GHEORGHE IANCU Problema minoritilor etnice din Romnia n documente ale Societii Naiunilor 1923-1932 Le problme des minorits

ts ethniques de la Roumanie dans des documents de la Socit des Nations 1923-1932 Ethnic Minorities from Romania in Documents from the Nations Society 1923-1932

GHEORGHE IANCU Problema minoritilor etnice din Romnia n documente ale Societii Naiunilor
(1923-1932)

Le problme des minorits ethniques de la Roumanie dans des documents de la Socit des Nations
(1923-1932)

Ethnic Minorities from Romania in Documents from the Nations Society

(1923-1932)

EDITURA ARGONAUT Cluj-Napoca, 2002

CUPRINS

Cuvnt nainte .............................................................................. p. 7 Studiu istoric .............................................................................. p. 39

Documente 1. Erik Colban, Note preliminare (1923) ................................ p. 140 2. Erik Colban, Relatare asupra cltoriei n Romnia (mai 1924) (Chestiuni minoritare, n special probleme colare) ............................................................... p. 236 3. Lucruri vzute de dl. Erik Colban n timpul ultimei cltorii n Transilvania (1926), de Vasile Stoica ............. p. 284 4. Pablo Azcarate, Cltoria n Romnia (octombrie 1930) ............................................................... p. 319 5. Pablo Azcarate, Not asupra cltoriei mele n Romnia (septembrie 1932) .......................................... p. 348 Bibliografie ............................................................................... p. 363 Indice de nume ......................................................................... p. 382

TABLE DE MATIRES / CONTENTS

Avant-propos / Foreword ................................................. p. 9 / p. 11
Historical Study ............................................................................ p.13

Documents 1. Erik Colban, Preliminary notes (1923) ................................ p. 65 2. Erik Colban, Record of Journey to Romania, May 1924 (Minorities Questions, Especially School Questions) ........ p. 214 3. Choses vues par M. Erik Colban pendant son dernier voyage en Transylvanie (1926) by Vasile Stoica ............... p. 259 4. Pablo Azcarate, Mon voyage en Roumanie octobre 1930 ....................................................................... p. 308 5. Pablo Azcarate, Note sur mon voyage en Roumanie (septembre 1932) ............................................................... p. 332 Bibliographie / Bibliography .................................................... p. 363

Index .......................................................................................... p. 382

CUVNT NAINTE
Problematica minoritilor de limb, ras i religie, n fapt protecia lor, i are nceputurile departe n timp, n plin ev mediu. S-au ntreprins atunci doar demersuri pentru protecia religioas a cretinilor din Imperiul Otoman, apoi, pacea de la Westfalia (1648) s-a impus ca moment de referin cu reglementri de aceeai natur n spaiul vest european. Congresul de la Viena (1815), ntr-o form embrionar, i de la Berlin (1878) au adus n prim plan i protecia etno-naional. Tratatele de pace i tratatele minoritilor, elaborate de Conferina de Pace de la Paris (1919-1920), au abordat amplu i profund fenomenul. Acestea, mpreun cu dispoziiile Societii Naiunilor n materie, formeaz aa-numitul sistem de protecie a minoritilor de limb, ras i religie, aflat sub egida Ligii Naiunilor (1920-1938). Dup dezastrul unor minoriti, n preajma i n timpul celui de-al Doilea Rzboi Mondial, Organizaia Naiunilor Unite a inclus mai ferm drepturile minoritilor n evantaiul larg al drepturilor fundamentale ale omului. n acest volum, noi plasm logic Romnia i statutul minoritilor din ar n ansamblul reglementrilor interne i internaionale ale perioadei tratate. Sursele de cercetare a problematicii sunt foarte vaste. Dintre acestea ne-am oprit asupra i publicm rapoarte ntocmite de efii Seciei administrative i minoriti de la Societatea Naiunilor, Erik Colban, diplomat norvegian i Pablo de Azcarate, diplomat spaniol, n urma cltoriilor de informare efectuate n Romnia n anii 1923, 1924, 1926, respectiv, 1930 i 1932. Probabil mai sunt i alte documente de acest gen de care noi, n aceast faz a cercetrii nu dispunem. Primele dou rapoarte ale lui Colban au fost publicate ntr-o mare msur (p. 193-229 i p. 230-243) n limba francez, de Marie-Rene Mouton, n 1969, ntr-o tez de doctorat susinut la Universitatea din Grenoble. Recunoatem, deci, pe deplin primatul tiinific al cercettoarei franceze pentru introducerea n circuitul tiinific a acestor documente aflate n Arhivele de la Geneva. Noi, avnd n vedere circulaia restrns a tezei, le relum, le publicm n limba englez i n traducere n limba romn i le mai adugm alte trei documente, toate cu explicaiile tiinifice necesare. ntr-un domeniu n care prerile, opiniile i concluziile n-au fost i nu sunt nici astzi identice punctul de vedere al statului romn, al majoritarilor romni, a fost i este acompaniat de opiniile mai mult sau mai puin stridente, mai mult sau mai puin justificate, ale minoritarilor. n aceeai sfer a raporturilor dintre statul romn i minoritile naionale, documentele din volum reliefeaz pregnant c n societatea romneasc a vremii n-au fost doar aspecte roze, dar n nici un caz nici doar negre, sumbre. Multe din aciunile statutului romn au fost apreciate de trimiii Ligii, astfel nct nclinm s credem c n jocul de culori de care vorbeam albul este preponderent. Informaii istorice de acest gen au fost rar utilizate de istorici. Tocmai de aceea, sperana noastr este c ele, completate cu alte documente, interne i externe, care se vor descoperi, vor ajuta la publicarea de scrieri mai veridice pe o tematic att de controversat. Specificm c prin Transilvania nelegem teritoriile unite cu Romnia la 1 Decembrie 1918 (Transilvania propriu-zis, Banatul, Criana, Maramureul) * mi exprim gratitudinea fa de Fundaia Soros pentru o Societate Deschis (Open Society Foundation), care mi-a oferit cu generozitate sprijinul financiar pentru adunarea materialului documentar la Arhivele de la Geneva i de la Bucureti. Profesorului univ. dm Mller din Cluj-Napoca i mulumesc pentru c dosarul meu a ajuns n timp util la Fundaie. i transmit cele mai calde mulumiri doamnei director al Arhivelor din Geneva din anul n care am lucrat acolo, Ursula-Maria Ruser, pentru amabilitatea dnsei i pentru ajutorul pe care mi l-a dat ntr-un moment de cumpn trit de mine la Geneva. Domnului Constantin Turcu i rmn ndatorat pentru indicaiile utile i materialele pe care mi le-a pus la dispoziie. Le sunt recunosctor istoricilor clujeni: Andrei Magyari, George Cipianu, Mihaela Cosma, Minerva Lovin, Ioan Bolovan, Ottmar Trac, Virgiliu ru i Mdly Lornd, profesorilor de limb francez

Gabriela Raiu i Enea Cipianu i studentului n istorie Mihai Alexandrescu, pentru ajutorul acordat de fiecare n elaborarea volumului. Mulumesc familiei mele care m-a nconjurat cu cldur uman i nelegere. Am cuvinte de mulumire i pentru Editura ARGONAUT, condus de cercettorul dr. Emil Pop, care a avut amabilitatea s-mi tipreasc volumul. Gheorghe IANCU

AVANT-PROPOS

Lensemble des problmes concernant les minorits, plus exactement leur protection, date depuis Le Moyen Age. A cette poque il sagissait des dmarches pour la protection religieuse des chrtiens de LEmpire Ottoman; plus tard, la paix de Westphalie (1648) impose des rglements similaires dans lespace de lEurope Occidentale. Le Congrs de Vienne (1815), dune manire embrionaire, et plus tard Le Congrs de Berlin (1878) mettent au premier plan la protection des minorits nationales. Les traits de paix et ceux concernant les minorits, labors par la Confrence de paix de Paris (1919-1920) ont abord le phenomne plus profondment. Ces traits tout comme les dispositions de la Socit des Nations, visant ce problme, forment le soit-disant systme de protection des minorits qui ont la mme langue, race et religion, dvelopp sous les auspices de la Socit. Aprs le dsastre qui a affect certains minorits avant et pendant la Deuxime Guerre Mondiale, lOrganisation des Nations Unies a inclu dune manire plus ferme les droits des minorits dans le cadre des droits fondamentaux de lhomme. Dans ce volume nous plaons la Roumanie et le statut des minorits de notre pays dans lensemble des rglements internes et internationales de la priode que nous avons aborde. Les sources pour cette recherche sont trs vastes mais pour ce volume nous avons choisi des rapports rdigs par les chefs de la Section Administration et Minorits de la Socit des Nations, Erik Colban, diplomat norvgien et Pablo Azcarate, diplomat espagnol, la suite de leurs voyages de documentation en Roumanie de 1923, 1924 respectivement de 1930 et 1932. Il y a, probablement, dautres documents sur le mme sujet dont nous ne diposons pas dans cette phase de la recherche. Une grande partie de premiers deux rapports de Colban (pp.193-229 et 230-243) a t publie en franais par Marie-Rene Mouton, en 1969, dans une thse de doctorat lUniversit de Grenoble. Nous reconnaisons donc la primaut scientifique de cette contribution franaise et le mrit de mettre en circulation ces documents qui se trouvent dans les archives de Genve. Prenant en considration la circulation limite de la thse, nous avons decid dajouter une version anglaise et une autre roumaine de ces matriaux, tout comme dautre trois documents accompagns des notes explicatives. Dans un domaine o les opinions et les conclusions nont pas t et ne sont pas identiques, le point de vue de ltat roumain a t et est accompagn par les opinions plus ou moins stridentes, plus ou moins justifies des minorits. Dans le mme domaine des rapports de ltat roumain avec les minorits nationales, les documents inclus dans ce livre rendent clair le fait que dans la socit roumaine de ce temps-l les choses ne sont pas ni seulement roses ni sombres. Beaucoup dactions de ltat roumain ont t bien apprcies par les missaires de la Socit ce qui nous fait croire que, dans le jeu des couleurs mentionn auparavant, le blanc est prpondrant. Informations de ce genre ont t rarement utilises par des historiens. Nous esprons que la publication de ces documents sera suivie par dautres qui seront dcouverts et qui vont contribuer llaboration dtudes plus vridiques et compltes concernant ce problme. Nous voulons prciser quen parlant de la Transylvanie nous prenons en considration les territoires devenus part de la Roumanie par lunion ralise au premier dcembre 1918 (La Transylvanie proprement dite, le Banat, la Crisana et le Maramures). * Je voudrais exprimer ma gratitude envers la Fondation Soros pour une socit ouverte (Open Society Foundation) qui ma offert avec beaucoup de gnrosit le support financier pour avoir accs aux archives de Genve et de Bucarest. Je remercie aussi au Professeur Adm Mller par lamabilit duquel mon dossier est arriv temps la Fondation. Je voudrais exprimer mes plus chaleureux remerciements la directrice des Archives de Genve, madame Ursula-Maria Ruser, pour son amabilit et pour lappui offert dans un moment difficile que jai travers Genve.

Je suis profondment reconnaissant monsieur Constantin Turcu pour ses trs utiles suggestions et pour les matriaux mis ma disposition. Je suis galement reconnaissant aux historiens de Cluj Andrei Magyari, George Cipianu, Mihaela Cosma, Minerva Lovin, Ioan Bolovan, Ottmar Trasc, Virgiliu Tru et Mdly Lornd, aux professeurs de franais Gabriela Ratiu et Enea Cipianu tout comme ltudiant en histoire Mihai Alexandrescu pour leur contribution l laboration de ce livre. Japprcie beaucoup et je remercie ma famille.pour leur chaleureux appui. Je remercie aussi monsieur dr. Emil Pop, directeur de la maison ddition ARGONAUT, pour avoir lamabilit de publier ce livre. Gheorghe IANCU

FOREWORD

The problem of language, race and faith minorities has deep roots in history, dating back to the 16th century, when steps have been taken in order to assure the religious protection of Christians in the Ottoman Empire. Then, in 1648 the Westphalia Peace marked with its new regulations of this kind, a landmark turning point in West European area. The peace Congress in Vienna (1815), in an embryonic stage, and the Congress of Berlin (1878) placed the protection of minorities in the foreground of the international relations. The peace Treaties and the minorities, signed at the Paris Peace Conference (1919-1920) takled amply and profoundly the minorities problem. These Treaties alongside the rulings of the League of Nations in this matter have constituted what one could call a protection system of minorities of language, race and religion under the aegis of the League of Nations (1920-1938). After the disaster struck certain minorities on the eve and during the World War II, the Organization of the United Nations included the minorities rights into the domain of the fundamental rights of man. In this volume, naturally, we have placed Romania within the wider ambit of the internal and international debate and regulations of the period we treated. Sources consist of vast amounts of documents. From all these, we chose for publication reports forwarded by high officers of the League of nations, chiefs of the Department of Administration and Minorities of the League, the Norwegian diplomat Erik Colban and Pablo Azcarate, a Spanish diplomat, after they traveled to Romania in 1923, 1924, 1926, and respectively 1930 and 1932. There may be other documents of this kind, which in this phase of research we do not have. The first two reports of Colban have been to a large extent published in French by Marie Rene Mouton, in 1969 (p. 193-229 and p. 230-243) in her doctoral thesis La Socit des Nations et la protection des minoris. Exemple de la Transylvanie (1920-1928) she has defended at the University of Grenoble. Consequently we acknowledge here her being the first having put in circulation these documents kept in the Geneva Archives. Given the limited circulation of the thesis, we decided to publish them again in English and in a Romanian version together with other three documents and explanatory notes. In a problem where opinions and conclusions have never been and are not identical, the official point of view of the Romanian state, and of the majority population (the Romanians) has been and still is paralleled by the vociferous, more or less justified protest of the minorities. Within the same ambit of the relations of the Romanian state with the minorities living on its territory, the documents published in the volume pregnantly show that in the Romanian society things were not always all roses, but that, at the same time, somber nuances were not dominant either. Many of the actions of the Romanian state have been positively appreciated by the envoys of the League so that we tend to believe that in that combination of colors bright shades predominate. Historical sources of this kind have seldom been used by historians. This is why our hope is that completed with other documents, internal and external, which will be brought to light by future researches, they will help to write a more true history of a controversial subject. * I would like to extend here my most sincere thanks to Soros Foundation for an Open Society, which generously put at my disposal the necessary funds for research and documents gathering in the Archives of Geneva and Bucharest. I am indebted to Mr. Mller, university professor in Cluj Napoca, whom I thank for having forwarded my file in time to the Foundation. I owe to Mrs. Ursula-Maria Ruser, director of the Geneva Archives, a debt of gratitude for her kindness and helping hand she extended to me when I was in Geneva and for her friendly solidarity in a difficult moment I had there.

I am grateful to Cluj historians: Andrei Magyari, George Cipianu, Mihaela Cosma, Virgiliu ru, Ottmar Trac, Minerva Lovin, Ioan Bolovan, Lorant Mdly, as well as to the French teachers Gabriela Raiu and Enea Cipianu, and to the student Mihai Alexandrescu for their help and constant solicitude. I express my gratitude to my family, who surrounded me with human warmth and understanding. My final word of thanks goes to the Publishing House ARGONAUT, and its director, researcher dr. Emil Pop, who published this volume. Gheorghe IANCU

HISTORICAL STUDY

The Union of Transylvania with Romania on December 1, 1918 meant the achievement of the national state unity of the Romanian people. Small Romania, created in 1859, became Greater Romania through the successive incorporation of Bessarabia, Bucovina and Transylvania. A state covering an area of 195,049 square kilometers, with a population of 18,052,896 inhabitants in 1930, Greater Romania was determined to make its own contribution to the progress of material and spiritual civilization in this part of Europe. On the whole, between the years 1859-1918, the Romanian people went through a period of important achievements, as well as through some rather difficult moments. But, anchored in the international realities of the time and proving to be politically mature, the Romanian people managed to impose their desire of political unity in a very dignified way. In 1910, the Romanians, the oldest inhabitants of Transylvania, represented 53,8% of the population of the province and were the majority in 19 of the 23 districts. The Hungarians accounted for 28% of the population; they were in the majority only in the districts of Ciuc, Mure, Odorhei and Trei Scaune. The Saxons failed to form an absolute majority in any district, but lived in compact groups in the districts of Trnava Mare, Sibiu, Braov, Trnava Mic and Bistria-Nsud. In towns, the Hungarians represented 53,4%, as against 17,6% Romanians. Although the Romanians were the majority of the population in Transylvania, in the course of time they had often been subject of the double domination of the Habsburg Empire and of the privileged social strata in Transylvania. In 1848 and then in 1868, Transylvania had become a constituent part of Hungary, in spite of the protest of the Romanian population. In the political context of Austrian-Hungarian Dualism, the Hungarian governments promoted a policy of forced assimilation and forced Magyarization of the other nationalities in the country, including the Romanians. Therefore, their normal evolution was hindered in every field of activity. The Memorandum Trial and many other trials, the banning of the Romanian National Party, the education laws directed against Romanian confessional teaching, the electoral abuses, the removal of Romanian officials from the administration, the wartime arrests were all deeply resented by the Romanians. The Romanian world in Hungary tait pouss lexaspration par la politique mesquine des classes dominantes hongroises, a Hungarian politician in Arad observed later. Many Romanian and foreign historical works have emphasised the reactionary essence of the policy of the Hungarian governments concerning the minorities, offering, by way of illustration, examples that we are not going to discuss here and now. In spite of countless hindrances, the Romanian national movement was a constant element in the political life of Hungary. When the First World War broke out, the Romanian people had to make new choices.

The politicians in the Romanian Kingdom decided that the country should adopt a policy of neutrality toward the parties involved in conflict. Romanias geographical position, its human potential, its riches determined both sides to urge Romania to enter the war. The most precious offer Romania was made was to be promised some territories inhabited in the majority by Romanians, that were part of the neighbouring Empires, in case of victory. The countries of the Entente offered it Transylvania, the whole of the Banat and Bukovina. In their turn, the Central Powers offered it Bessarabia and even more. For instance, on September 7, 1914, Ottokar Czernin had in view the transfer of Bukovina to Romania and Transylvanias autonomy in return for Romanias neutrality and possible future alliance. The vehement opposition of the Hungarian Government led to the abandonment of such a solution. After long negotiations, the treaty of alliance between Romania and the Entente was concluded in Bucharest, on August 17, 1916. The way the Romanians felt was decisive in the establishment of the Romanian policy. Cest avant tout pour dlivrer frres Transylvains que les Roumains sont entrs dans la guerre, Emmanuel de Martonne noticed later. What Romania did not know at the time was that soon after this a secret agreement was concluded between France and Russia, stating that the clause of the territorial provisions in the Treaty with Romania was not compulsory and that this matter could be agreed on at the end of the war, depending on the conditions existing then. Risking to anticipate a little, we may say that such facts are of much help in understanding the position of the Allied Powers toward Romania after the conclusion of the separate peace with the Central Powers. Beginning with the summer of 1918, especially after the defeat of the German troops in the second battle of the Marne (25 June 7 August), on the western front the general situation was favourable to the Entente. The front in the Balkans registered a certain stagnation until the second half of September. For Romania, the military campaign of 1916 ended in disaster. In spite of the victories of Mreti, Mrti and Oituz, in the summer of 1917, consequent to the Russian defection that occurred after the Bolshevik coup, Romania could not continue to fight any longer. Thus, it was forced to sign the armistice of Focani, in December 1917, an later, a separate peace with the Central Powers, in Bucharest, on May 7, 1918. Therefore, Romanias Treaty with the Entente became null and void, with all the inherent consequences. In those hard moments for Romania, the Allied Powers insisted in assuring it that their policy had not chanced, in essence. The object of later arguments between them and Romania, rather than its status as an allied country, would be the content of the treaty of 1916. By its human and material sacrifices, as well as by its aspirations, Romania never considered itself outside the Entente, but waited for the favourable time to rejoin it, in order to fight for a common cause. On October 17, 1918, for instance, King Ferdinand sent a telegram to the President of France and one to the Prime-Minister, mentioning that: Mon pays entier, tout comme moi, attend avec impatience le moment o les circonstances lui permettront de joindre ses efforts ceux de nos amis et o il pourra raliser son idal national avec lappui de ceux qui combattent pour la Grande Cause de la Justice. Meanwhile, the offensive of the Allied Armies in the East yielded remarkable results. Bulgaria and Turkey were forced to conclude armistices, the allied armies were getting closer and closer to the Danube. Exercising control over the Black Sea, they could make their way to the Ukraine. Their objectives were still the same, namely to force Austria-Hungary out of the war and afterwards make it participate in an attack against Germany.

On the night of November 9/10, 1918, the first French troops crossed the Danube, determined to make their own contribution to the driving away of the German troops from Romanian territory. On November 11, the rivervalley was cleared of the enemy along a distance of 120 km. and a depth of 6-8 km, when there was news about the conclusion of the armistice with Germany. The Treaty concluded with Romania in May, 1918, was now pronounced null and void, Romania once again hoping to achieve its national ideal. At the end of October and the beginning of November, 1918, under the pressure of the Western and Southern fronts, the Austrio-Hungarian Monarchy was about to collapse. The peoples movement for national emancipation was shaking its very foundations. In the middle of October, the Monarchy made a desperate attempt to adjust, at least in part, to the new domestic and international conditions. On October 16, 1918, Kaiser Charles issued the manifesto titled To My Faithful Peoples, which proposed the re-organization of the Empire within a confederation of six independent states, never affecting the integrity of the Hungarian state. The move was belated and useless. The oppressed peoples had already stepped on the path leading to their total independence. The Allied and Associated Powers announced the Central Powers, in the notes sent on October 12 and 17, 1918, that the armistice to be concluded would be based on the peoples right to self-determination. Le droit de libre dtermination, George Sofronie estimated, tait ainsi officiellement reconnu et ses applications dans la ralit internationale allaient faire de lui une rgle normative et constitutionnelle dans le nouveau statut de la communaut internationale. Consequent to the revolution in Hungary, on October 31, 1918, Krolyi Mihly, a politician well-known for his pro-Entente sympathies, became Prime-Minister. The new government tried to persuade public opinion that it represented a neutral country, which had completely broken with its Dualist past and adopted the Wilsonian principles. It tried to obtain a new diplomatic statute for Hungary to allow it to preserve its territorial integrity, at least until the Peace Conference, which could bring about the final territorial decisions. With these aims in mind, the Government addressed itself to the Commander of the Allied troops in the East for the conclusion of the separate armistice for Hungary. The negotiations started in Belgrade on November 7, between Krolyi and Franchet dEsperey and ended on November 13, with the signing up of the military Convention of Armistice by General Paul P. Henrys, the Voyvode ivojin Mii Franchet dEspereys delegates and Linder Bla, the delegate of Hungarian Government. The Convention stipulated that the Hungarian troops should withdraw in 8 days North of a demarcation line that started from the upper course of the Someul Mare, crossed Bistria, Mure-Sat (nowadays the village Suseni, district of Mure) and then followed the Mure up to its junction with the Theis, continuing through Maria Theresiopol (Szabadka, Subotica), Baja, Fnkfirchen localities not occupied by the Hungarian troops on the course of the Drava up to where the river meets the frontier of Slavonia-Croatia. The Allies were going to occupy the evacuated regions under the conditions decided by the convention which also mentioned that the administration remained under the control of the Hungarian Government, that the allies should not interfere with the administration of the Hungarian Government, that the Hungarian army was to be reduced to 6 divisions of infantry and 2 of cavalry, meant to enforce order; if needed, the allies were free to occupy any locality or strategic point in Hungary and to use the existing communications means; mention was also made that any relations between Hungary and Germany were to be severed; Mackensens German troops were given 15 days to transit Hungary etc.

The origin, as well as the name of the Military Armistice Convention is quite ambiguous, suggesting that it was a mere military act subsequent to the general Armistice with the Austrio-Hungarian Monarchy; the negotiations, the content of the adopted document and its consequences are issues that have been much debated in historical literature, therefore we shall confine ourselves to some brief general considerations. The Hungarian delegation was not considered to be the representative of a neutral, pro-Entente state, but of a local power, which could not detach itself from the responsibilities of the Hungarian government at the outbreak of the war and during the war, a power with which they negotiated without military and strategic reasons; when the negotiations started, Germany was still at war. Ormos Mria has demonstrated that the French General kept in touch with Paris all the time, wherefrom he was sent the text of the armistice signed at Padua and probably that of the Armistice Convention too. Still, some of its provisions seem surprising, if we think of those with an internal political character; the lack of any references to Czechoslovakia, the lack of realism in what concerns the orders referring to Mackensens army and especially the establishment of the demarcation line. Most authors are of the opinion that the latter was not established according to firm ethnographic, geographic and strategic principles. One thing is certain. Franchet dEsperey did not know the territorial provisions of the treaty of Bucharest, signed in 1916, as he himself acknowledged in Bucharest on December 10, 1918 and Paris, on September 16, 1919, in a discussion with Alexandru Vaida-Voevod, whom he told that he thought the Mure was the natural border of the Romanian element. We may therefore suppose that the French General had full powers when he established the demarcation line. In the same context, we may mention that, the day when the Convention was concluded, the representatives of the Romanians in Transylvania had acted to break Transylvania away from Hungary, and that Romania had re-joined the Entente on November 10. Still, the Romanians had no representatives at the negotiations, unlike the Serbs, who played an important role there and whose interests were better represented in the document drawn. Thus, it is no wonder that the Romanians never acceded to some of the provisions in the Convention, especially to those referring to the course of the demarcation line and to the stipulation that the administration of Transylvania should remain under the control of the Hungarian Government. Although the Krolyi Government tried to present the Belgrade document as a recognition of Hungarys territorial integrity, its content did contribute to the loss of its prestige in the eyes of the Hungarian public opinion, which had expected much more from a pro-Entente Government. The French Government realized the shortcomings of the Convention soon and that brought about the Conventions provisional status, though one may speak about its actual replacement only on February 26, 1919, when the Peace Conference decided the creation of a really neutral zone between Romanian and Hungarian forces. This increased the tension between Hungary and Romania, as well as between Hungary and Czechoslovakia. That was why both the representatives of the Romanians in Transylvania and those from Romanian Kingdom protested on several occasions, both before December 1 and after the declaration of the union of Transylvania asunder. In its turn, the Hungarian Government protested against Romanias and Czechoslovachias not having observed the Convention, as long as it was valid. A French military Mission led by Lieutenant-Colonel Fernand Vix, was established in Budapest, as of November 26, 1918. Its mission was to supervise the application of the provisions of the Armistice Convention.

Although the allies knew every detail of Romanias difficult situation after November 1917, they did not seem to like the idea of Romanians concluding a separate peace. But the unavoidable occurred, in May 1918. In the autumn of that year, the Allied Powers went through a period of consultations and hesitations in order to reach a conclusion about Romanias diplomatic status, especially because the United States refused to take into account the secret treaties concluded during the war. Robert Lansings note of November 5, 1918, swept off the Romanians doubts concerning the policy of American Government as far as Romanian national aspirations were concerned: The President accordingly desires me to inform you that the Government of the United States is not unmindful of the aspirations of the Romanian people without as well as within the boundaries of the Kingdom. Meanwhile, on November 10, Romania rejoined the fight and on November 13, the military Convention of Belgrade was concluded. The Romanian troops were given permission to enter Transylvania again, in order to occupy positions along the dividing line; this may be explained both by the fact that Franchet dEsperey had not enough forces to act that way and by the fact that the Allies had actually recognized the Romanian armies as allied forces. On January 15, 1919, France, in agreement with the other allies, recognized Romanias status as an ally, though insisting that the Treaty of 1916 be just a starting point for the discussions at the Peace Conference. In this international context briefly presented here, in October-November 1918, several actions of the Romanians in Transylvania, in the Old Kingdom and abroad took place; they led to the union of Transylvania with Romania on December 1, 1918. In these months, a strong feeling of national solidarity was achieved. Such a strong National Block imposed itself by cohesion, political maturity and a democratic spirit. It could not be diverted by any means, overt or covert, from its decision to create Greater Romania. The main political force that led the process of Transylvanias Union with Romania was the Romanian National Party, in close connection with the authorities in Iai. It was also joined by some of the Romanian socialists, who understood the importance of achieving Romanian state unity. On October 31, 1918, the Central Romanian National Council was founded in Budapest; it consisted of 6 representatives of the Romanian National Party (tefan Cicio-Pop, Vasile Goldi, Aurel Lazr, Teodor Mihali, Alexandru Vaida-Voevod, Aurel Lazr) and 6 socialists (Tiron Albani, Ioan Fluera, Enea Grapini, Iosif Jumanca, Iosif Renoiu, Bazil Surdu). After November 2, the Council was to have its headquarters in Arad. Thus, the Romanian union movement gained a unique leading forum, wide and more representative. Though the national councils and the Romanian national guards the supreme headquarters of the guards were appointed on November 11 the Council gradually took control of the greatest part of the Transylvanian territory. The Romanian national councils, the embryos of the Romanian administration, launched themselves into a complex activity, without entirely replacing the old authorities, but carefully controlling them, and, sometimes, co-operating with the national councils of other nationalities, in order to preserve order and defend the citizens lives and goods. Their main goal was to pave the way for the National Assembly in Alba-Iulia. Enforcing its positions in Transylvania, on November 6, the Central Romanian National Council reaffirmed its quality of unique representative of the Romanian people in Transylvania, just one day before the start of the Belgrade negotiations, in which the Krolyi Government tried in vain to participate as a representative of all the nations in Hungary. On

November 9, the Council took a great step forward, by sending an ultimatum to the Hungarian Government, asking it to relinquish power in the 23 districts inhabited by Romanians in majority. The refusal of the Hungarian Government to accept this ultimatum, as well as the predictable failure of the negotiations in Arad (November 13 15) led to the issuing of a Manifesto on November 18, in which the Council expressed its will to exercise control over its own fate, promising to respect the liberty of the other nationalities in Transylvania. On November 20, the great National Assembly was convened for December 1, at Alba-Iulia. The days between November 20 and December 1 were used to elect the delegates in a democratic way, to issue and discuss the Act of Union, to prepare its technical implications: thousands of Romanians marched towards the citadel of Michael the Brave, Horea and Iancu. Everything went on in an atmosphere of calm and order, with no interference of the Hungarian authorities. The process we have presented might seem linear and with a certain triumphalist note. That is why we should stress that, beside the Romanian part, there was also a Hungarian side that acted on several levels; a side that stood in firm opposition to the Romanian conception of creating Grater Romania and which showed its opposition in several ways, both before and after December 1. The allies victorious attack on the Balkan front worried the Hungarian political forces. At the meeting of the Government and of the Chamber of Deputies, they discussed the problem of the borders with Romania, as well as the opportunity of bringing back into the country the Hungarian troops from the Western front. Preserving the territorial integrity of Hungary, and especially keeping Transylvania, was the fundamental objective of the policy of the Hungarian governments of the time, a fact that seems to have been quite natural. Jszi Oszkr (the Minister of Nationalities, November 11, 1918 January 19, 1919, in the Krolyi Government) pleaded for a Hungarian-owned Transylvania, organized on a cantonal basis, according to the Swiss pattern. He made this opinion known at the Arad negotiations, but the Romanian leaders did not accept it. After the Romanians had published the Manifesto to the nations of the world, on November 20, 1918, Jszi addressed himself to the peoples in Hungary, promising the non-Hungarian peoples cultural autonomy and the right to have their own administration wherever they were in majority, within a free and democratic Eastern Switzerland. About November 25, 1918, Jszi received another project which had in view the transformation of Hungary into an Eastern Switzerland composed of 14 cantons, of which 5 in Transylvania. In order to consolidate Hungarian political power in Transylvania, the project stipulated the creation of a district organism in the Province, an idea that went as far back as the year 1917. On November 1, a Transylvanian Committee was created, led by Apthy Istvn, and on December 11, the Governmental Commissariat for Eastern Hungary (Kelet Magyarorszgi Fkormnybiztossg), let by the same politician. The formation of the Szekler Regiment that had been supposed to defend the border with Romania and then the demarcation line, in the first stage, the useless appeals of the Government addressed to the Saxons, urging them to oppose the Romanian troops entering Transylvania, the attempt to negotiate with Mackensens army on the same grounds, the order that Hungarian civil servants should refuse to take the oath of fidelity to the new state if Transylvania got united with Romania belong to the same coordinates of the policy of the Hungarian Government.

After signing of the military Convention in Belgrade and after the failure of the Arad negotiations, Hungarian politicians, such as Bethlen Istvn, considered giving up the total territorial integrity of Hungary and attempting to constitute political units in Transylvania and the Banat. Thus, on November 28, the Szekler Republic led by Pal rpd was proclaimed, followed, on November 1, by the Banatian Republic, led by Otto Roth as well as by other, smaller republics. But all these attempts and projects could not stop the process initiated by the majority of the population in Transylvania, the Romanians, the process of uniting Transylvania with Romania. On December 1, the National Assembly in Alba-Iulia, in an atmosphere of great elation, adopted the Document of Transylvanias unconditional union with Romania, a document of a wide democratic scope. After December 1, 1918, the Hungarian politicians weighed other variants, aiming either at an independent or at an autonomous Transylvania, before the peace treaty was to be signed at Trianon. We may say that such ideas were made clear only after the union of Transylvania with Romania had become imminent. Until then, their constant concern had been to totally integrate this province into the Hungarian state. Meanwhile, the Hungarian authorities were making great efforts to organize a mass rally in Cluj, to which they invited all the non-Romanian inhabitants of Transylvania. Some days before the rally, which had been held on December 22, the Hungarian press predicted that about 100,000 people would gather, who were supposed to proclaim an independent Transylvanian Republic. On December 22 only about 50,000 people, Hungarians and Secklers, were present in Cluj. According to Mik Imre and Raffay Ern, others had been hindered from joining by the Romanian authorities. The opening speech was made by Apthy Istvn. Among other things, he said We have been defeated by a more numerous enemy, we have to acknowledge that they have defeated us. But we have not been so badly thrashed as to allow any of the neighbouring nations to lay hands on our fate, as to allow these nations to carve up the country. In the resolution that was adopted, mentioning Wilsons principles those present pronounced themselves for the preservation of the territorial integrity of the Hungarian state, within whose borders all nations could be granted equal rights, and protested against the Decision in Alba-Iulia. The Assembly elected a Hungarian Council for Transylvania left-wing social-democrats, Avramescu and trengar, who protested against the union of Transylvania with Romania, pronouncing themselves for Transylvanias remaining within the borders of a Democratic Hungarian Republic. The Hungarian leaders must have been aware that such decisions could never have been implemented. They intended to boost the morale of the Hungarian population in Transylvania and to show foreigners that there was a Hungarian community there, who were claiming their rights based on the Wilsonian principles. These actions were accompanied by constant and intense propaganda, conceived both within Transylvania and in Hungary. They strove to present foreigners with the image of a Hungarian community in Transylvania unfairly separated by force from Hungary, subjected to a terror regime by the Romanian authorities. This clich characteristic of that period, was not true to historical realities and was meant to impress international public opinion. Generally speaking, it was brandished all through the inter-war period.

In 1919 took place two armed conflicts between Romania and Hungary. In April 1919, the Romanian Army attacked the Hungarian troops, defeated them and occupied the two banks of the River Theiss. On July, the Communist regime led by Kun Bla tried to reoccupy Transylvania by force. Hungarian Offensive finished in a total defeat, and the regime collapsed. The Peace treaty of Trianon, June 4, 1920, which recognized the union of Transylvania with Romania, established the normal relationship between the two countries. Many writings had been dedicated to the history of the Transylvanian Saxons on the eve of Union and in the following period that determined us to present very briefly the position of this ethnic group towards the Union of Transylvania with Romania. A radical change of political option in the period October 1918 January 1919, was registered in the case of the Saxons in Transylvania (about 234,000 persons). On October 29, 1918, the broader Transylvanian Saxon Central Committee (erweiterte Schsische Zentralausschutz) declared itself in favor of the Transylvanian Saxon community remaining in the Hungarian state, but on January 8, 1919, at Media, they decided to adhere to the act of the Union of Transylvania with Romania. The internal and external events that took place that time, their clear analysis, the proper actions undertaken by the leaders of the Transylvanian Saxon let to the decision taken in Media. The Declaration of Media was a rational act, pragmatic and not emotional, based on the democratic provisions of the resolution of Alba-Iulia, but also on the negotiations carried on with the members of the Ruling Council and on the agreement that had occurred between the two parts. In the work mentioned, Fr. Teutsch wrote that the decision of Media was not easily taken by the Transylvanian Saxons because of their past history (Die Entscheidung in Media ist den Sachsen nicht gefallen). A document issued by the Legation of France in Bucharest on February 25, 1919, also presented the context of the decision of Media in the sense that the Transylvanian Saxons had made their decision in accordance with their conviction that Transylvania would in the end belong to Romania. Devant la situation actuelle, les Saxons, it was said in the document, gens chez lequels le sentiment de patrie est pour ainsi dire inexistant, ont immdiatement dcid de choisir tout naturellement la situation la plus conforme leur intrts personnels. Aussi, comprenant que la Transylvanie doit choir invitablement et definitivement la Roumanie, ils nont pas hsit proclamer lUnion au Grand Congrs dAlba-Iulia. Leur attitude actuelle vis--vis des Roumains, peut tre qualifie de correcte, mais cependant rien de plus. In an election speech in October, 1919, Rudolf Brandsch revealed the positive effects which the decision of Media had had on the Transylvanian Saxon population, by creating favourable conditions for the development of the Saxon community in Transylvania and in the Romanian state, in different fields. At the same time he emphasized the importance of the application of the decision of Alba-Iulia. After being elected deputy to the Romanian Parliament, Brandsch delivered another important speech on December 18, 1919, in which, in the name of the Transylvanian Saxon deputies, he reaffirmed the idea that the Transylvanian Saxons adhered to the Romanian state in accordance with the right of the nations to free decision, that they would be loyal citizens of the Romanian state, expressing the hope that the principles of Alba-Iulia, decisions permeated by the wit of real democracy, would be carried out in a fair manner.

In 1918, the total population of the Banat according to Sever Bocu was 1, 582,133 of whom 387,545 Swabians, coming second after the Romanians (592,049) then Serbs (284,329) and Hungarians (242,152). In the Banat region, the interest of the Hungarian, the Romanian and the Serb-Croat-Slovene states collided, as each of them wanted it all, at least in the initial phase. This situation fostered fierce competition, in the presence of the French occupation troops and under the influence of the debates at the Peace Conference. In this context, we can assert that in the main the Swabians moves and behavior were slower, more hesitant than in the case of the Transylvanian Saxons. We can appreciate that the main aim of the Swabians was to maintain the territorial, political and economic integrity of the Banat. When they declared themselves for the union of the Banat with Romania, on August 10, 1919, they wanted it maintained as an undivided entity. Irrespective of the existing orientations within the Swabian community, we think that that most of the population pronounced itself, in November-December 1918, in favor of preserving the territorial integrity of Hungary, including Banat; then, when they realized that Hungarys chances were small, they hesitated between Romania and Yugoslavia. When the division of the Banat has become almost a certainty, most of them decided definitely for Romania. We think that several factors contributed to it: the democratic content of the Union Decision of Alba-Iulia; the endeavours of some Transylvanian Saxon leaders, especially those of Rudolf Brandsch; the sad experience of the Serb occupation; the possibility of constituting a powerful German block in the Romanian Kingdom, which could back up their economic, political, cultural and religious interests. After the establishment of Romanian administration in the district of Cara-Severin and in Timioara, the Swabians held a great meeting on August 10, 1919, in Timioara, declaring themselves for the integrity of the Banat and its union with Romania, It was only then that a delegation of the Swabians, went to the Paris Conference to present their decision of adhesion to the Romanian state, by virtue of the right to self-determination. The chances of changing the decision taken by the Great Powers proved to be totally inefficient. The strongly Magyarized Swabians in Stmar went through a slow evolution toward asserting their own national-cultural identity, mostly because of the position of their priests. Thus it came about that in the 70s, there were Swabian villages in which the inhabitants used the Hungarian language mostly. The Slovaks and Ruthenians in Transylvania also adhered to the Romanian state, having representatives in the Parliament in Bucharest. Significant for the position of the National Union of the Jews of Transylvania regarding the international status of the province was the declaration of its President, T. Fischer, published in Patria of January 7, 1920: We, Jews, are neutral as far as external problems are concerned, but whatever decision the Peace Conference takes, we bow to it. Taking into consideration the real character of the situation, and processing some particular information, we are sure that the Union of Transylvania and the Romanian zones in Hungary, announced by the press, will be sanctioned by the Peace Conference. It would be better that this decision be published officially. We solemnly declare we shall be faithful citizen of the new state. We shall support the action of organizing the new state

and we hope Romania will prosper. We trust the Romanian Government and hope that this Government will be true to its commitments. We had close cultural-political connections with Magyars in the past and we cannot suddenly become their enemies. Nevertheless, in the newly created situation, and as a result of the policy of intolerance practiced by Hungary towards the Jews, the relation between us and they has changed very much. We do not identify ourselves with their non-cooperative policy. I repeat: we are neutral. Soon we shall take part in internal political fights. But our intention is temporarily paralyzed by special measures, today in force. Our program is: complete cultural autonomy and the creation of possibilities for our participation in the state life. In the first place, through proportional vote. I insisted a little on the position of the race, language and religion minorities that I define as national minorities because we may know where the things started from after December 1, and to understand the following attitude of the minorities in the Romanian state, including towards the representatives of the League of Nations. After World War I, the question of ethnic minorities in Romania had turned into a most significant constitutive element of political, economic, cultural and religious life, with manifould echoes abroad. There is a huge amount of Romanian and foreign historical literature dedicated to the topic, made up of legal documents issued by the Romanian state, official statistical data, memoranda addressed by various ministries to lay and ecclesiastic subordinate bodies, books and articles written by Romanian historians, sociologists, politicians. Other most valuable documents were issued by the League of Nations: some were addressed to the Romanian administration, others were general provisions concerning the protection of minorities in Europe or memoranda sent in reply to different people or institutions that had petitioned the League of Nations. The Leagues official publications, such as Journal Officiel de la Socit des Nations, were also very useful to our research. The General Assemblies, the Secretariat of the League, the Minorities Commission and the Committees of Three were the institutions called upon to take decisions in minority issues. Another category of documents, books and articles were elaborated by representatives of the minorities in the states that had signed the so-called Minorities Treaties in 1919 (Poland, Czechoslovakia, Greece, Yugoslavia and Romania). At the same time, many books and articles were written by neutral observers, who display different opinions, sometimes due to their political sympathies or the historical sources they had employed. These works were generally characterized by the fact that their authors had not made use of first-hand Romanian sources, after all decisive for any historical reconstruction. Therefore, one should not be surprised that stereotypes pass from one work to another, without bringing anything genuinely new. Foreign diplomatic documents sources quite seldom used in the works on minorities of language, race and religion had been regarded as mirroring allegedly unbiased opinions concerning the entire Romanian society or some of its spheres. The system of treaties signed at the Peace Conference in Paris (1919-1920) ascribed the Society of Nations, as institution and community of members, a significant part in the question of ethnic minorities. Thus, it was quite natural that the diplomatic representatives in the aforementioned countries had always had an eye on these issues, highly complex and sometimes with unpredictable, surprising outbursts, but the crystallization of their opinions depended upon many aspects, which we do not wish to detail here.

Anyway, their meetings with representatives of the administration, political parties and several cultural and religious institutions, the press and field trips were ways to gather reliable of information on the state-of-facts, on the basis of which they would draft the reports to their superiors. There is a huge amount of literature dedicated to the sessions of the Peace Conference and its various bodies. Therefore, we should only mention that on May 1, 1919, they set up the Commission for new states and minorities, presided over by Philippe Berthelot and made up of the representatives of France, Great Britain, the United States of America, Italy and Japan. The Commission elaborated the so-called Minorities Treaties. The first, called the Little Treaty of Versailles by the Polish historian Marian Drozdowski, was signed between the Great Powers and Poland on June 28, 1919, and it would be the model for all that followed. Czechoslovakia and Greece signed it on September 10, 1919, at the same time with the Treaty with Austria, Yugoslavia on December 5 and Romania on December 9, 1919. On May 10, Jewish delegations presented the aforementioned Commission with a detailed memorandum concerning the rights of ethnic minorities in general, with a few brief notes regarding the Jews in Romania. Specialists believed that the approaches made by various Jewish organizations to the Peace Conference had contributed to a great extent to the elaboration of the system for the minorities protection. These initiatives, although highly significant, should not be overrated. The protection of minorities would have been anyway imposed as a consequence of Wilsons ideas and of the principle of nationalities. The Great Powers wished to prevent the future outbreak of inter-state conflicts, generated by minority issues among others. First of all, they grounded their decision on their decisive contribution to the final victory and, secondly, on the quite large number of ethnic minorities in the newly created states or in those that expanded their territory. Czechoslovakia (34.6%), Poland (31.2%) and Romania (28.8%) were the countries in which the ratio of people belonging to ethnic minorities was the highest. The ratio was 5.2% higher in Romania than in all the other states included in the Table (23.6%). As concerns the number of people belonging to ethnic minorities in one country, the Ukrainians (4,000,000) and Jews (3,006,000) of Poland were on the first two places and the Hungarians of Romania (1,900,000) on the third. According to the Treaty signed on December 9, 1919, Romania undertook to turn some of its provisions, namely articles 2-8, into basic laws of the state, which no decree issued by the Romanian state could revoke. In brief, the content of the Treaty was the following: the Romanian state pledged to safeguard life, freedom and religious practice, to grant Romanian citizenship to every person born and residing in the country (Hungarians and Austrians), as well as to the Jews all over the country, who could not claim any other citizenship, to ensure equality in front of the law, etc. Article 11 concerned the granting of autonomy in religious and educational matters to the communities of Transylvanian Saxons and Secklers. The 1923 Romanian Constitution stipulated full equality for all Romanians in the sense of Romanian citizens irrespective of ethnic origin, language or religion, in any social, economic, political, cultural and religious field. Thus, the minorities question in Romania was ranged within the context of fundamental, home and foreign, legal provisions, accompanied by special bills passed by the Romanian administrations and the stipulations of the League of Nations Council regarding the procedure to solve all kinds of petitions, memoranda, notifications or letters addressed to the international body.

A most significant question, present in the documents issued by the League, which generated a vast historical literature, was the procedure with respect to minorities. George Sofronie, Nicolae Dacovici, Arthur de Balogh elaborated valuable works dedicated to this matter. The Treaties allowed small room to procedure issues. Essentially, the League of Nations Council and the Court of International Law in the Hague were charged with the task to supervise the implementation of the provisions included in the treaties. The subsequent regulations, issued until 1929, made up the body of specific stipulations in the respective matter. We would only like to emphasize the fact that the Councils decision of October 25, 1920 led to the setting up of the Committee of Three, the first court of appeal in a litigation between the Council and the state with minorities, which would analyze both the minorities petitions and the reply of the respective state and made recommendations to the Council. Romanian historical writing includes few books and studies dedicated to the question of ethnic minorities in Romania in the debates of the League of Nations. During the communist age, the question of ethnic minorities in the inter-war epoch was almost a taboo. Consequently, in the works dedicated to the relations between the Romanian state and the international organization of Geneva these issues were overlooked. Political interests imposed the historians silence on such important and complex facts and events. After 1989, one of the obstacles not yet overcome has been the still unsolved situation of internal archive funds which centralized a wide range of issued related to the question under discussion. What we wish to underline is the fact that our researches carried on in Bucharest, Geneva, London and Budapest have led us to the conclusion that the relations between the Romanian governments and the League of Nations were quite close, without any tinge of restraint or silence over the recommendations or notifications that came from the part of the League of Nations. They were materialized in many meetings between Romanias representative to the League, Nicolae Petrescu- Comnen, other Romanian politicians, chiefly Nicolae Titulescu and I. G. Duca, and Geneva officials, illustrated by a huge amount of documents issued in Bucharest and Geneva. A special place is held by the field trips made in Romania by the presidents of the Administrative and Minority Department, Erik Colban, in 1923, 1924, 1926 and Pablo de Azcarate, in 1930 and 1932 at the invitation of the Romanian governments, whose conclusions we are publishing in the present work. Though the solutions suggested by the Romanian administrations were not always appreciated by the Geneva officials or by the minority members who appealed to the League, two aspects are worthy to be mentioned: 1. the constant concern displayed by the League of Nations and the Romanian governments to come to terms with the provisions of the Minority Treaties, the Leagues decisions regarding the minorities and the state-of-facts; 2. the sometimes very efficient dialogue between the Romanian authorities and the representatives of the minorities. For instance, in the second case we have in view the dialogue between the two sides, carried on with significant results all along the period they had elaborated the bills of elementary (1924) and private (1925) education. After the passing of the first bill, in a conversation with I. G. Duca, quoted by the British consul in Bucharest, Herbert Dering, deputy Hans Otto Roth stated that, although not fully satisfied with the provisions of the bill, he had been reminded it that the Minorities had got 95% of their demands and that thus might therefore concede the remaining 5%. This had been realized and further opposition had been withdrawn and the Bill had been passed.

Like in all other states, the minorities of Romania chiefly asserted their stand towards their status by means of petitions sent to Geneva. Most of the petitions were sent by the German community of Poland, namely 100, whereas the Hungarians of Romania drafted, according to some sources, 40 petitions. As concerns Romania, besides the Hungarians petitions, the League also received memoranda from the Ukrainians, Russians, Ruthenians, Bulgarians and Germans. They were sent by political parties, secular and ecclesiastic institutions, private persons. Following our researches we have managed to identify the sources. Thus, we know their content, the senders, the notes made by the administrations and the final decisions taken by the Leagues bodies. The petitions concerned various issues, such as: * school issues (education bills; closing of schools; seizure of buildings that belonged to minorities, by the Romanian state as successor of the Hungarian state; graduation exams; number of classes of Romanian language in minority public or private schools; insufficient financial support granted by the Romanian state to minority schools); * ecclesiastic issues (expropriation of land owned by minority churches); * agrarian issues (implementation of the land reform; some provisions of the land bill; seizure of arable land or forests); * individual rights; * issues related to nationality; * property revision in Southern Dobrudja; The effective activity of the League of Nations began on the 10th of January 1920. In short time at Geneva arrived a large number of documents sent by layman or clergymen, from Romania and abroad, concerning the presumed non-observance of the Minorities Treaty by the Romanian Government. In these circumstances, and in the context of a practice instituted at the League, Erik Cloban head of the Administrative and Minorities Sections came to Romania in 1923 on an informative visit. In the opinion of the officials in Geneva, such informative visits were considered very useful in order to obtain a better and profound knowledge of the realities less or partial known at the League. After his first visit, he came again, in 1924 and 1926. The new head of the Commissions at the League from 1927 on, Pablo Azcarate, made similar visits to Romania in 1930 and 1932. We want to emphasize the fact that during these visits, both of them respected the informative character, in accordance with the objectives of the League which did not want to transform them in inquiries on the minorities situation, as some of the minorities representatives hoped. Moreover, each time when the representatives of the League paid a visit to Romania, they came at the official invitation of the Romanian authorities. Even if these visits were not very long in time, they were substantial, Colban and Azcarate eating and sleeping several times in train. From their reports it results that they met during those visits a large number of Romanian officials, and not only, in order to be acquainted with the situation: the King, the Queen, Prime-ministers, Ministers, Deputy Ministers, Directors and other officials of the Romanian government, political representatives of the minorities, the representatives of different churches in Romania, professors, teachers, peasants, etc. Of course, the questions came each time from the guests. In an open, calm and polite environment Romanian officials presented

documents, responses, justifications for their actions and the representatives of the minorities expressed their views and dissatisfactions. During their trips in the country they never met explosive situations, which can lead to ethnic conflicts. If the reader could have a map of Romania before his eyes he could see the itinerary of the visits paid by the representatives of the League, to towns as Bucureti, Sinaia, Braov, Sibiu, Cluj, Miercurea Ciuc, Gheorghieni, Odorhei, Aiud, Turda, Oradea, but also very nice places as Bile Tunad and Felix, Red Lake, etc. Their culture, a good knowledge of foreign languages, was determinant in their efforts to become familiar with vast and unknown problems. Certainly a contribution to their success was their preparation in Geneva and the experience acquired in different countries. If the reports of 1923 and 1930 contain general considerations on the situation of the minorities in Romania, the others of 1924, 1926 and 1932 are dealing with the specific problems: the Land reform, school laws from 1924 and 1925, the problem of the way in which the Romanian state understood to finance the minorities schools and churches, the problem of private goods in Ciuc county, or the problem of public and political liberties, all of them remaining from then controversial phenomenons in the historiography. We do not intend to make here a very profound analysis of the documents, being aware of the fact that a large number of documents on these problems, especially from the archives, are not in historical circulation. In many ways the documents contained in the volume speak for themselves. We hope that the bibliography we present here will help the reader with information, opinions and different analyses.

STUDIU ISTORIC
Unirea Transilvaniei cu Romnia la 1 Decembrie 1918 a nsemnat desvrirea unitii naional-statale a poporului romn. Mica Romnie de la 1859 a devenit Romnia Mare prin unirile succesive ale Basarabiei, Bucovinei i Transilvaniei, rezultnd un stat cu o suprafa de 295.049 km2 i cu o populaie n anul 1930 de 18.052.896 locuitori, decis s-i aduc contribuia la progresul civilizaiei materiale i spirituale din aceast zon a Europei. Romnii, populaia cea mai veche din Transilvania, reprezentau, n anul 1910, 53,7 % din populaia provinciei i deineau majoritatea n 19 din cele 23 comitate. Procentul populaiei maghiare era de 31,6 %, fiind ntr-un numr preponderent doar n comitatele Ciuc, Mure, Odorhei i Trei-Scaune. Saii nu formau n nici un comitat o majoritate absolut dar constituiau mase compacte n comitatele Trnava-Mare, Sibiu, Braov, Trnava-Mic i Bistria-Nsud. n lumea oraelor maghiarii reprezentau 53,4% fa de doar 17,6 % ct era procentul romnesc1. Dei romnii formau majoritatea populaiei din Transilvania, de-a lungul timpului ei au avut de suferit o dominaie, de multe ori dual, a Imperiului Habsburgic i a pturilor privilegiate din Transilvania. La 1848, i apoi n anul 1868, Transilvania a fost unit cu Ungaria n pofida protestelor populaiei romneti. Astfel au disprut treptat elementele definitorii ale autonomiei ei. n contextul politic al dualismului austro-ungar, guvernele maghiare au promovat o politic de asimilare i de maghiarizare forat a celorlalte popoare din ar, ntre care s-au aflat i romnii. Evoluia normal a acestora a fost mpiedicat n toate domeniile de activitate.

Procesul Memorandumului i alte numeroase procese de pres, interzicerea Partidului Naional Romn, legile colare ndreptate mpotriva nvmntului romnesc confesional, abuzurile electorale, eliminarea funcionarilor romni din administraie, arestrile i internrile din timpul rzboiului, au fost puternic resimite de romni. Lumea romneasc din Ungaria tait pousse a lexasperation par la politique meschine des classes dominantes hongroises constata ceva mai trziu, un om politic maghiar din Arad2. Multe lucrri de istorie, romneti i strine, au relevat esena reacionar a politicii guvernelor maghiare fa de minoriti, oferind multiple exemple n acest sens, asupra crora noi nu vom reveni3. n pofida tuturor piedicilor, micarea naional romneasc a fost o constant n viaa politic a Ungariei dualiste. Odat cu izbucnirea primului rzboi mondial poporul romn s-a aflat n faa unor noi opiuni. Oamenii politici din Regatul Romnia au decis ca ara s adopte o politic de neutralitate fa de prile implicate n conflict. Poziia geografic, potenialul uman, bogiile solului i ale subsolului de care dispunea Romnia au determinat ca fiecare din cele dou tabere beligerante s ntreprind aciuni menite a o atrage n rzboi de partea ei. ncadrarea, n caz de victorie, n statul naional romn, a unor teritorii locuite n majoritate de romni, aflate n componena Imperiilor vecine, era oferta cu cea mai mare greutate care i se prezenta. rile Antantei i ofereau Transilvania, Banatul n ntregime i Bucovina. La rndul lor, Puterile Centrale ofereau Basarabia, i chiar mai mult. De pild, la 7 septembrie 1914, Ottokar Czernin avea n vedere the transfer of Bukovina to Romania and Transylvanias autonomy in return for Romanias neutrality and possible future alliance4. Opoziia vehement a guvernului maghiar a fcut ca o asemenea soluie s fie abandonat. Dup lungi tratative s-a ncheiat la Bucureti, n 17 august 1916, tratatul de alian a Romniei cu Antanta. Starea de spirit din ar a fost decisiv n stabilirea politicii romneti. Cest avant tout pour dlivrer frres Transylvains que les Roumains sont entrs dans la guerre, va consemna Emmanuel de Martonne mai trziu5. Ceea ce n-a tiut atunci Romnia a fost c la scurt timp s-a ncheiat un acord secret ntre Frana i Rusia, n care nu se considera obligatorie respectarea clauzelor teritoriale din tratatul cu Romnia, ci acestea puteau fi stabilite la sfritul rzboiului, n funcie de condiiile concrete.6 ntr-o asemenea lumin, chiar dac anticipm puin, este mult mai uor de descifrat poziia Puterilor Aliate fa de Romnia, dup ncheierea pcii separate cu Puterile Centrale. Pe frontul occidental, ncepnd cu vara anului 1918, n special dup eecul armatelor germane n a doua btlie de la Marna (25 iulie 7 august), situaia general evolua n favoarea Antantei. Frontul din Balcani a nregistrat o stagnare pn la a doua jumtate a lunii septembrie. Pentru Romnia, campania militar din anul 1916 se ncheiase cu un dezastru. n pofida paginilor de glorie nscrise n vara anului 1917 la Mreti, Mrti i Oituz, n urma defeciunii ruse, provocat n urma loviturii de stat bolevice, Romnia a ajuns n imposibilitatea de a mai continua lupta. S-a vzut astfel silit s ncheie armistiiul de la Focani, n decembrie 1917, i apoi pacea separat cu Puterile Centrale, la Bucureti, n 7 mai 1918. Ca atare, tratatul Romniei din 1916 cu Antanta devenea caduc, cu toate consecinele care puteau decurge din aceasta. n acele momente grele pentru Romnia, puterile Aliate au decis s dea asigurri c politica lor fa de ea nu s-a schimbat, n esen, ceea ce va face, mai trziu, obiectul unor schimburi de opinii contradictorii, n chestiune fiind nu att statutul social de aliat al Romniei, ct mai ales coninutul tratatului din 1916.

Prin sacrificiile sale umane i materiale i prin aspiraii, Romnia nu s-a socotit nici un moment n afara puterilor Antantei, ateptnd cu speran, doar momentul favorabil care s-i permit s acioneze din nou, pentru cauza comun. La 17 octombrie 1918 regele Ferdinand le-a trimis preedintelui i prim-ministrului Franei cte o telegram, specificndu-se c: Mon pays entier tout comme moi attend avec impatience le moment les circonstances lui permettreront de joindre ses efforts ceux de nos amis et il pourra raliser son idal national avec lappui de ceux qui combattent pour la grande Cause de Justice7. ntre timp ofensiva declanat de Armatele Aliate din Orient la 15 septembrie 1918 s-a soldat cu rezultate remarcabile. Bulgaria i Turcia au fost silite s ncheie armistiii, armatele aliate se apropiau de linia Dunrii i, controlnd Marea Neagr se puteau ndrepta spre Ucraina. Obiectivele lor rmneau n continuare, scoaterea Austro- Ungariei din rzboi i apoi participarea la un atac mpotriva Germaniei8. n noaptea de 9/10 noiembrie 1918 primele uniti franceze au trecut linia Dunrii, fiind decise s contribuie la alungarea trupelor germane de pe pmntul romnesc. n 11 septembrie fluviul era degajat pe un front de 120 km. i pe o adncime de 6-8 km., cnd a sosit vestea ncheierii armistiiului cu Germania. Tratatul de pace ncheiat de Romnia n mai 1918 se declara nul i neavenit, statul romn putnd astfel aspira la mplinirea idealului su naional. Sub presiunea fronturilor din vest i din sud, la sfritul lunii octombrie i la nceputul lunii urmtoare, monarhia austro-ungar era n pragul prbuirii. Micarea de emancipare a popoarelor asuprite a zdruncinat-o din temelii. La mijlocul lunii octombrie monarhia a fcut o micare disperat de a se salva, mcar parial, adaptndu-se noilor stri de lucruri interne i internaionale. La 16 octombrie 1918 aprea manifestul mpratului Ctre popoarele mele credincioase prin care se avea n vedere reorganizarea imperiului ntr-o confederaie de ase state independente, n care s nu fie afectat ns integritatea statului maghiar. Era prea trziu i inutil. Popoarele asuprite fcuser i fceau pai decisivi pe drumul independenei totale. Puterile Aliate i Asociate fcuser cunoscut Puterilor Centrale prin notele din 12 i 17 octombrie 1918 c armistiiile ce se vor ncheia se vor baza pe dreptul popoarelor la autodeterminare9. Prin aceasta, Le droit de libre dtermination, apreciaz George Sofronie, tait ainsi efficiellement reconnu et ses applications dans la ralit internationale allaient faire de lui une rgle normative et constitutionelle dans le nouveau statut de la communaut internationale10. n urma revoluiei din Ungaria, la 31 octombrie 1918, Krolyi Mihly, om politic cunoscut pentru opiniile sale favorabile Antantei, devenea prim-ministru. Noul guvern ncerca s se prezinte ca un reprezentant al unei ri neutre, care a rupt total cu trecutul dualist i a adoptat principiile wilsoniene. El cuta s obin un nou statut diplomatic pentru Ungaria, care s i permit pstrarea integritii teritoriale, cel puin pn cnd Conferina de Pace ar fi adus decizii definitive n plan teritorial. Cu asemenea obiective, guvernul s-a adresat comandantului trupelor aliate din Orient n vederea ncheierii unui armistiiu separat pentru Ungaria. Tratativele au nceput la 7 noiembrie, la Belgrad, ntre Krolyi i Franchet dEsperey i s-au ncheiat la 13 noiembrie prin semnarea Conveniei militare de armistiiu de ctre generalul Paul P. Henrys i voievodul ivojin Mii delegaii lui Franchet dEsperey i de ctre Lider Bla, trimisul guvernului ungar. Convenia stipula c trupele maghiare trebuiau s se retrag n termen de 8 zile la nord de o linie demarcaional care pornea de pe cursul superior al Someului Mare, trecea prin

Bistria, Mure-sat (azi ctun contopit comunei Suseni, judeul Mure), urma cursul Mureului pn la confluena cu Tisa. Maria-Theresiopol (Szabadka, Subotica), Baja, Fnfkirchen (Pcs), aceste localiti nefiind ocupate de trupele maghiare, cursul Dravei pn la ntlnirea rului cu frontiera Slavoniei-Croaiei. Aliaii urmau s ocupe regiunea evacuat n condiiile fixate de Comandantul ef al Armatelor Aliate din Orient. Convenia mai prevedea: administraia rmnea sub controlul guvernului maghiar, aliaii neamestecndu-se n adminstraia intern a statului maghiar, armata maghiar urma s fie redus la 6 divizii de infanterie i 2 de cavalerie, destinate meninerii ordinii; aliaii puteau ocupa n caz de nevoie orice localitate sau punct strategic din cuprinsul Ungariei, puteau folosi mijloacele i cile de comunicaie; ncetarea oricror relaii dintre Ungaria i Germania; i stabileau 15 zile pentru trecerea i staionarea trupelor germane ale lui Mackensen prin Ungaria etc. Originea Conveniei militare de armistiiu nsi denumirea este destul de ambigu, sugernd a fi doar un act militar de completare a armistiiului general cu Monarhia desfurarea tratativelor, coninutul documentului adoptat i urmrile sale sunt subiecte mult dezbtute n literatura istoric, astfel c noi ne vom mrgini doar la cteva succinte consideraii de ordin general11. Delegaia maghiar nu a fost socotit ca reprezentanta unui stat neutru, antantofil, ci ca o putere local, care nu se putea detaa de rspunderile guvernelor maghiare n declanarea i purtarea rzboiului; se trata cu ea din considerente de ordin militar i strategic la nceperea tratativelor Germania aflndu-se nc n lupt. Ormos Mria demonstreaz c guvernul francez s-a aflat n legtur continu cu Parisul, de unde i parvenise textul armistiiului de la Padua i probabil i al Conveniei de armistiiu. Cu toate acestea unele din prevederile ei par surprinztoare, cum ar fi cele cu caracter politic intern, lipsa referirilor la Cehoslovacia, nerealismul dispoziiilor referitoare la armata lui Mackensen i mai ales fixarea liniei de demarcaie. Opiniile converg n a constata c acesta din urm nu se baza pe principii etnografice, geografice i strategice ferme. Un lucru acum este cert. Frachet dEsperey n-a cunoscut prevederile teritoriale ale tratatului de la Bucureti din anul 1916, fapt recunoscut de el la 10 decembrie 1918 la Bucureti, ca i ntr-o convorbire avut la Paris, n 16 septembrie cu Alexandru Vaida-Voevod, cruia i-a declarat c el a crezut c Mureul este grania elementului romnesc12. Se presupune deci, c generalul a avut o competen destul de larg n stabilirea liniei de demarcaie. n acelai context se cuvine remarcat c la data semnrii conveniei, reprezentanii romnilor din Transilvania i manifestaser decizia ferm de desprindere a Transilvaniei de Ungaria dup cum vom vedea i c Romnia reintrase n tabra Antantei, la 10 noiembrie. Cu toate acestea romnii nu au fost reprezentai la tratative, spre deosebire de srbi care au avut un rol important n desfurarea lor i ale cror interese sunt mai bine reflectate n actul ncheiat. Nu e de mirare deci, c romnii nu s-au mpcat niciodat cu unele prevederi ale Conveniei, mai ales cu cele referitoare la locul liniei de demarcaie i la meninerea administraiei din Transilvania sub controlul guvernului maghiar. Dei guvernul Krolyi a ncercat s prezinte actul de la Belgrad ca o recunoatere a integritii teritoriale a Ungariei, totui, coninutul lui a contribuit la scderea prestigiului lui n rndul opiniei publice maghiare, care se ateptase la mai mult de la un guvern antantofil. Guvernul francez i-a dat seama la scurt timp de imperfeciunile Conveniei, ceea ce i-a atras un statut de provizorat. De o nlocuire efectiv a ei se poate vorbi doar la 26 februarie 1919, cnd Conferina de Pace a decis crearea unei zone neutre, reale ntre forele romne i maghiare. Ea a fost generatoare de ambiguiti, de tensiuni ntre Ungaria i Romnia, sau

Ungaria i Cehoslovacia. De aceea reprezentanii romnilor, att din Transilvania ct i din Regatul Romnia, au protestat n numeroase rnduri, mai ales mpotriva meninerii liniei de demarcaie, care tia teritoriul Transilvaniei n dou i nainte de 1 Decembrie i dup Declaraia de Unire a Transilvaniei cu Romnia. La rndul su guvernul maghiar a protestat, pe ntreaga perioad de aplicabilitate a Conveniei, mpotriva pretinselor nclcri din partea Romniei i Cehoslovaciei. La Budapesta, ncepnd cu 26 noiembrie, a funcionat o misiune militar francez, condus de locotenent-colonel Fernand Vix, care avea menirea s supravegheze aplicabilitatea Conveniei de armistiiu. Dei aliaii au cunoscut n toate detaliile situaia grav n care se gsea Romnia dup noiembrie 1917, ei n-au agreat ideea ncheierii de ctre Romnia a unei pci separate. Inevitabilul s-a produs ns n mai 1918. n toamna aceluiai an, Puterile Aliate au avut o serie de ezitri, de consultri pentru a-i preciza punctul de vedere cu privire la statutul diplomatic al Romniei, mai ales c SUA nu era dispus s ia n considerare tratatele secrete ncheiate n anii rzboiului. Nota lui Robert Lansing din 5 noiembrie 1918 risipea ndoielile romnilor cu privire la politica guvernului american fa de aspiraiile naionale romneti: The President accordingly desires me to inform you that the Government of the United States is not unmindful of the aspirations of the Romanian people without as well as within the boundaries of the Kingdom13. ntre timp, la 10 noiembrie Romnia reintra n lupt, iar la 13 noiembrie se ncheia convenia militar de la Belgrad. Permisiunea ca trupele romne s intre n Transilvania pentru a ocupa poziii de-a lungul liniei demarcaionale se explic nu numai prin lipsa forelor de care dispunea Franchet dEsperey pentru a realiza o astfel de operaiune, ci i a faptului c aliaii au recunoscut de fapt, armatele romne ca fore aliate. La 15 ianuarie 1919, Frana n acord cu ceilali aliai a recunoscut statutul de aliat al Romniei, fcndu-se ns cunoscut c tratatul din 1916 va constitui doar o baz de discuie la Conferina de Pace. n acest context internaional succint conturat s-au desfurat n lunile octombrie-noiembrie 1918 aciunile romnilor din Transilvania, din Regat i din strintate, care au avut ca rezultat unirea Transilvaniei cu Romnia la 1 Decembrie 1918. n acele luni s-a realizat o autentic solidaritate naional. Un asemenea Bloc Naional solid s-a impus prin for, coeziune, maturitate politic i spirit democratic. El n-a putut fi clintit de nici o ncercare fi sau de culise din hotrrea de a realiza Romnia Mare. Fora politic principal care a condus nemijlocit la procesul unirii Transilvaniei cu Romnia a fost Partidul Naional Romn, aflat n legtur cu autoritile de la Iai. I s-a alturat i o parte a socialitilor romni, care au neles importana desvririi statele romneti. La 31 octombrie 1918 se constituia la Budapesta Consiliul Naional Romn Central, format din cte 6 reprezentani ai Partidului Naional Romn (tefan Cicio-Pop, Vasile Goldi, Aurel Lazr, Teodor Mihali, Alexandru Vaida-Voevod, Aurel Vlad) i 6 ai socialitilor (Tiron Albani, Ioan Fluera, Enea Grapini, Iosif Jumanca, Iosif Renoiu, Bazil Surdu), care se va stabili la 2 noiembrie la Arad. Micarea romneasc pentru unire dobndea astfel un for unic pentru conducere, mai larg i mai reprezentativ. Prin consiliile naionale i grzile naionale romne, constituite ntr-o atmosfer de aleas srbtoare, Consiliul Comanda suprem a grzilor s-a format la 11 noiembrie i-a impus treptat controlul asupra celei mai mari pri a teritoriului Transilvaniei. Consiliile naionale romne, embrionul

administraiei romneti, au desfurat o activitate complex, fr a se substitui integral vechilor autoriti, exercitnd, n schimb, asupra lor un control atent i colabornd, n unele locuri, cu consiliile naionale ale altor popoare, pentru meninerea ordinii i aprarea vieii i bunurilor cetenilor. Obiectivul lor prioritar va fi pregtirea Adunrii Naionale de la Alba-Iulia. Consolidndu-i poziiile n Transilvania, la 6 noiembrie, Consiliul Naional Romn Central i-a reafirmat calitatea de unic reprezentant al poporului romn din Transilvania, aceasta cu o zi naintea nceperii tratativelor de la Belgrad, la care guvernul Krolyi a ncercat, fr succes ns, s se prezinte ca exponent al tuturor popoarelor din Ungaria. La 9 noiembrie Consiliul a fcut un mare pas nainte prin trimiterea unui ultimatum guvernului maghiar cerndu-i predarea puterii de guvernare asupra celor 23 de comitate locuite n majoritate de romni. Refuzul guvernului maghiar de a se conforma acestui demers, previzibil, al tratativelor de la Arad (13-15 noiembrie), au determinat la 18 noiembrie s se lanseze un Manifest ctre Popoarele lumii, prin care naiunea romn i exprim voina ferm de a dispune singur de soarta sa, angajndu-se s respecte libertatea celorlalte popoare din Transilvania. La 20 noiembrie se convoca Adunarea Naional pentru ziua de 1 Decembrie de la Alba-Iulia. Zilele scurse ntre 20 noiembrie i 1 Decembrie au avut ca i coninut alegerea democratic a delegailor, elaborarea i dezbaterea Actului de Unire, pregtirea desfurrii ei tehnice, revrsarea mulimii de romni spre cetatea lui Mihai Viteazul, Horea i Iancu. Totul s-a desfurat ntr-o atmosfer de srbtoare, de calm i de ordine, autoritile maghiare nempiedicnd pregtirile romneti. Procesul prezentat de noi ar putea prea liniar, cu uoare nuane triumfaliste. De aceea se cuvine s subliniem c alturi de partea romneasc a existat i acionat, pe multiple planuri i o tabr maghiar, constituit din guvernele i oamenii politici din Ungaria i Transilvania, care s-a opus categoric concepiei romneti de creare a Romniei Mari, i care a cunoscut mai multe variante de manifestare n perioada de pn la 1 Decembrie 1918 i dup acest eveniment. Ofensiva victorioas aliat de pe frontul din Balcani a trezit ngrijorare n rndul forelor politice maghiare. n edinele de guvern sau ale Camerei Deputailor s-a discutat chestiunea granielor cu Romnia, relevndu-se oportunitatea aducerii n ar a trupelor maghiare de pe frontul de vest. Meninerea integrrii teritoriale a Ungariei i, mai ales, pstrarea Transilvaniei au fost obiectivul fundamental al politicii guvernelor maghiare din epoc, fapt care apare ca absolut firesc. Oszkr Jszi, ministrul naionalitilor (1 noiembrie 1918-19 ianuarie 1919) n guvernul Krolyi avea n vedere organizarea Transilvaniei pe baze cantonale, dup modelul Elveiei14, fcnd ns parte din Ungaria. Aceast opinie a expus-o i n timpul tratativelor de la Arad, nefiind ns acceptat de fruntaii romni. Dup publicarea de ctre romni a Manifestului ctre popoarele lumii, la 20 noiembrie 1918 Jszi s-a adresat i el, printr-un Manifest popoarelor Ungariei, promind popoarelor nemaghiare autonomie cultural i dreptul de a se administra acolo unde erau n majoritate, n cadrul unei Elveii rsritene libere i democratice15. Un alt proiect care avea n vedere transformarea Ungariei ntr-o Elveie rsritean format din 14 cantoane, din care 5 s se organizeze n Transilvania, i-a parvenit lui Jszi n jurul datei de 25 noiembrie 191816.

Pentru consolidarea puterii politice maghiare n Transilvania se preconizase nc din anul 1917 constituirea unui organism distinct n provincie. La 1 noiembrie se nfiina Comitetul Transilvnean condus de Apty Istvn, iar la 11 noiembrie 1918 Comisariatul Guvernamental pentru Ungaria de Rsrit (Kelet Mgyarorsgy Fkormnybiztossg), condus de acelai om politic17. Constituirea Diviziei secuieti, care ar fi trebuit, ntr-o prim etap, s apere grania cu Romnia, apoi linia de demarcaie18, apelurile fcute de guvern sailor s se opun trecerii armatelor romne n Transilvania, fr efect ns, ncercarea de a intra n tratative cu armate lui Mackesen n acelai scop, dispoziia din luna noiembrie ca n cazul unirii Transilvaniei cu Romnia funcionarii maghiari de aici s nu depun jurmntul de fidelitate fa de noul stat, se nscriu n aceleai coordonate ale politicii guvernului maghiar. Dup ncheierea Conveniei militare de la Belgrad i dup euarea tratativelor de la Arad, oamenii politici maghiari, de pild Istvn Bethlen, au luat n considerare i ideea renunrii la totala integritate teritorial a Ungariei, preconizndu-se constituirea de uniti politice n Transilvania i Banat, acolo unde romnii nu erau n mase compacte. Aa s-a ajuns la proclamarea Republicii Secuieti la 28 noiembrie, condus de Pal Arpd, a Republicii Bnene la 1 noiembrie, condus de Otto Roth, ca i a altor republici mai mici19. Toate aceste demersuri i proiecte n-au putut ns opri procesul iniiat de majoritatea populaiei din Transilvania romneasc, de unire a Transilvaniei cu Romnia. La 1 Decembrie 1918 Adunarea Naional de la Alba-Iulia adopta ntr-o atmosfer de srbtoare actul Unirii Transilvaniei cu Romnia, fr nici o condiie, document de larg respiraie democratic. Prin aceasta Romnia Mare devenea o realitate istoric. Conferina de Pace de la Paris a consfinit nfptuirile n plan politico-teritorial ale Romniei. Dup 1 Decembrie 1918 oamenii politici maghiari au avut n vedere, pn la semnarea tratatului de pace de la Trianon, alte variante care vizau o Transilvanie independent sau una autonom. Se cuvine subliniat c asemenea concepii s-au cristalizat doar cnd unirea Transilvaniei cu Romnia devenise iminent. Pn atunci preocuparea lor constant fusese integrarea total a acestei provincii n cadrul statului maghiar. Autoritile maghiare fceau, n acelai timp eforturi deosebite pentru inerea la Cluj a unei mari adunri populare, la care au fost invitai toi locuitorii neromni ai Transilvaniei. Cu cteva zile naintea Adunrii, desfurat n 22 decembrie, presa maghiar vorbea despre o ntrunire a cca. 100.000 de oameni, care ar proclama Republica Ardelean independent. La Cluj, n 22 decembrie, au fost prezeni cca 50.000 de oameni, maghiari i vabi, o parte a celor ce ar fi dorit s ajung la Cluj fiind mpiedicai, n opiniile lui Mik Imre i Raffay Ern de autoritile romneti. Cuvntul de deschidere a fost rostit de Apthy Istvn. ntre altele, el a spus: Am fost nvini de puterea mai numeroas a dumanilor, trebuie s recunoatem c ne-au nvins. Dar n-am fost nvini ntr-o aa msur nct oricare din naiunile din jur s dispun de soarta noastr, ca naiunile din jur s poat mpri ara20. n Rezoluia adoptat, fcndu-se apel la principiile wilsoniene, cei prezeni s-au pronunat pentru meninerea integritii teritoriale a statului maghiar n care toate naiunile s se bucure de drepturi largi, protestndu-se mpotriva Hotrrii de la Alba-Iulia. Adunarea a ales un Consiliu Dirigent maghiar al Transilvaniei format din reprezentani ai partidelor Independenei, Radical i Social-Democrat.

Printre vorbitori s-au numrat i doi social-democrai de stnga, romni, Avramescu i Strengar, care au protestat mpotriva unirii Transilvaniei cu Romnia, declarndu-se de acord ca Transilvania s rmn n cadrele unei Republici maghiare democratice. Liderii maghiari, cred c erau contieni c hotrrile adoptate nu se vor putea pune n practic. Ei au urmrit o mbrbtare a populaiei maghiare din Transilvania i s arate strinilor c aici exist o puternic comunitate maghiar, care-i revendica drepturile bazate pe principiile wilsoniene. Aceste aciuni erau nsoite de o intens propagand extern. Se cuta s se prezinte strintii imaginea unei comuniti maghiare din Transilvania, pe nedrept separat cu fora de Ungaria i supus unui regim de teroare de ctre autoritile romneti. Acest clieu specific epocii nu era n concordan cu realitile istorice i avea menirea de a impresiona opinia public internaional. La drept vorbind acesta a fost folosit n ntreaga perioad interbelic. n anul 1919 au avut loc dou conflicte armate ntre Romnia i Ungaria. n aprilie, armata romn a atacat trupele maghiare de pe linia de demarcaie, le-a nfrnt i a ocupat cele dou maluri ale Tisei. n iulie, statul comunist maghiar, condus de Kun Bla, a ncercat s reocupe cu fora Transilvania. Ofensiva maghiar s-a terminat cu o nfrngere total i regimul s-a prbuit. Tratatul de pace de la Trianon din 4 iunie 1920, care a recunoscut unirea Transilvaniei cu Romnia, a dus la o stare de normalitate ntre cele dou ri, n anul urmtor stabilindu-se relaii diplomatice ntre ele. Saii, vabii i evreii din Transilvania au urmrit cu atenie evenimentele, stabilindu-i conduita n funcie de interesele lor naionale. Pn acum s-au scris multe lucruri despre istoria sailor din Transilvania n preajma unirii i n perioada urmtoare, de aceea, acum, vom prezenta foarte succint poziia acestui grup etnic fa de evenimentul de la 1 Decembrie 191821. n intervalul octombrie 1918-ianuarie 1919 s-a produs o schimbare radical a opiunilor politice ale sailor (circa 234.000 de persoane). n 20 octombrie 1918 Comitetul central lrgit al sailor (erweiterte Schische Zentralauschuss) a declarat c saii doresc s rmn n cadrul statului maghiar. n 8 ianuarie 1919, la Media, ei au hotrt s adere la actul Unirii Transilvaniei cu Romnia. Evenimentele interne i externe care au avut loc n epoc, analiza lor limpede, aciunile proprii ntreprinse de liderii lor au condus la hotrrea de la Media. Declaraia din 8 ianuarie 1919 a fost un act raional, pragmatic, deloc emoional, bazat pe prevederile democratice ale Rezoluiei de la Alba-Iulia, pe tratativele avute cu membri ai Consiliului Dirigent i a acordurilor ncheiate ntre cele dou pri. n lucrarea menionat, Fr. Teutsch scria c decizia de la Media n-a fost luat cu uurin, din cauza trecutului istoric (Die Entscheidung in Media ist den Sachsen nicht gefallen)22. Un document elaborat de legaia Franei din Bucureti, datat 25 februarie 1919, prezint de asemenea contextul n care s-a luat hotrrea de la Media, n sensul c saii au decis aa fiind convini c Transilvania va aparinea n cele din urm Romniei: Devant la situation actuelle, les Saxons, se spunea n document, gens chez lequels le sentiment de patrie est pour ainsi dire inexistant, ont immdiatement dcid de choisir tout naturellement la situation la plus conforme leur intrts personnels. Aussi, comprenant que la Transylvanie doit choir invitablement et definitivement la Roumanie, ils nont pas hsit proclamer lUnion au Grand Congrs dAlba-Iulia. Leur attitude ectuelle vis--vis des Roumains, peut tre qualifie de correcte, mais cependant rien de plus23.

ntr-o cuvntare electoral din octombrie 1919 R. Brandsch s-a declarat mulumit de felul n care s-a putut dezvolta comunitatea sseasc din Transilvania n cadrele statului romn, n diferitele compartimente, subliniind i necesitatea aplicrii n via a hotrrilor de la Alba-Iulia24. i tot el, ales deputat n parlamentul romn, a rostit o cuvntare n Adunarea Deputailor la 18 decembrie 1919, n care, n numele deputailor sai, a reafirmat c saii au aderat la statul romn, pe baza dreptului de autodeterminare a popoarelor i c ei vor fi ceteni loiali ai statului romn, exprimndu-i sperana c principiile de la Alba-Iulia, hotrri ptrunse de spiritul adevratei democraii vor fi aplicate ntr-o manier corect25. n anul 1918 populaia total a Banatului n conformitate cu datele oferite de Sever Bocu era de 1.582.133, dintre care 387.545 vabi, ocupnd locul doi dup romni (592.049), srbi erau 284.329, iar maghiari 242.15226. Banatul, care aparinea Ungariei, era vizat de Romnia i de statul srbo-croato-sloven, fiecare din aceste state dorindu-l n ntregime, cel puin ntr-o prim faz. S-a ajuns la o competiie acerb ntre ele. Situaia s-a complicat odat cu ocuparea temporar a Banatului de trupele srbeti i mai ales cu prezena forelor armate de ocupaie franceze. Dezbaterile Conferinei de Pace pe aceast tem erau urmrite cu nfrigurare de ctre toi. n acest context noi apreciem c micrile vabilor au fost mai lente, mai ezitante dect ale sailor transilvneni27. Se poate afirma c obiectivul suprem al vabilor era s se menin integritatea teritorial i economic a Banatului. Atunci cnd ei s-au pronunat, n 10 august 1919, pentru aderarea la statul romn ei au dorit ca Banatul s rmn o entitate indivizibil. n pofida existenei mai multor orientri politice printre vabi, credem c n intervalul noiembrie-decembrie 1918 majoritatea dintre ei se pronuna pentru integritatea Ungariei, inclusiv a Banatului. Cnd au neles c ansele Ungariei de a pstra Banatul erau minime, ei au oscilat ntre Romnia i Iugoslavia. n momentul n care mprirea Banatului a devenit o certitudine, cei mai muli dintre vabi au privit spre Romnia. Mai muli factori au concurat la aceast atitudine: coninutul democratic al Hotrrii de Unire, demersurile unor oameni politici sai, n special ale lui Rudolf Brandsch, experiena trist a ocupaiei srbeti, ansa de a se constitui un bloc german puternic n Regatul Romnia, care le va putea sprijini interesele economice, politice, culturale i religioase. Dup instituirea administraiei n judeul Cara-Severin i n Timioara, vabii au inut o adunare n Timioara la 10 august 1919, declarndu-se pentru unitatea Banatului i unirea lui cu Romnia. n curnd, o delegaie a lor s-a dus la Paris i-a prezentat Conferinei de Pace decizia lor de aderare la statul romn. Ei nu au putut influena hotrrea luat deja de Conferin de mprire a Banatului ntre Romnia i Iugoslavia28. vabii din Stmar, puternic maghiarizai i-au redobndit cu greutate i n timp, identitatea lor naional-cultural i aceasta n primul rnd din cauza opoziiei preoilor lor catolici. Slovacii i rutenii din Transilvania au aderat de asemenea la statul romn, avnd reprezentani n primul parlament al Romniei Mari. Semnificativ pentru poziia Uniunii evreilor ardeleni cu privire la statutul internaional al acestei provincii este declaraia preedintelui ei, Teodor Fischer, publicat n Patria din Cluj la 7 ianuarie 1920: Noi evreii suntem neutrali n faa problemelor externe, dar oricare este hotrrea Conferinei de Pace, ne plecm n faa ei i, considernd caracterul real al situaiunii, pe cum i n posesiunea fiind ale unor informaiuni particulare, suntem ncredinai c unirea Ardealului i a prilor romneti din Ungaria, anunat prin pres, este consfinit i de Conferina de Pace.

Ar fi consult ca aceast hotrre s fie publicat n mod oficial. Noi declarm solemn c vom fi ceteni loiali ai noului stat. Vom sprijini aciunea de nchegare a statului nou i dorim nflorirea Romniei. Avem ncredere n guvernul romn i sperm c principiile de guvernare ale brbailor de stat romni se vor traduce n fapte. Noi am avut strnse legturi culturale-politice cu ungurii n trecut i nu putem deveni din senin dumani ai lor. Totui, n faa situaiei noi care s-a creat i n urma politicii de intoleran practicat n Ungaria fa de evrei, raportul ntre noi i ei s-a modificat mult. Nu ne identificm nici cu politica lor de rezisten. V repet: noi suntem neutrali. n curnd ns vom lua parte la luptele politice interne. De aceea inteniunea noastr este paralizat n mod temporar prin msurile excepionale care sunt azi n vigoare. Programul nostru este autonomie cultural deplin i crearea posibilitilor pentru validitatea noastr n viaa de stat. n primul rnd prin votul proporional. Am insistat asupra poziiei minoritilor de ras, limb i religie pe care le vom defini ca minoriti naionale pentru a se cunoate starea de lucruri de la care s-a pornit n acest domeniu dup 1 Decembrie 1918, i a se nelege atitudinea viitoare a minoritilor naionale din statul romn inclusiv fa de reprezentani ai Societii Naiunilor. Problema minoritilor etnice din Romnia dup primul Rzboi Mondial s-a constituit ntr-o component important a vieii politice, economice, culturale i religioase, cu multiple reverberaii externe. Literatura istoric romn i strin dedicat acestui fenomen este imens. Aceasta se compune din acte legislative emanate de la statul romn, din datele statistice oficiale, din adresele diferitelor ministere trimise organelor subordonate, laice i ecleziastice, din crile i articolele scrise de istorici, sociologi, oameni politici romni. Alte valoroase documente sunt cele emanate de la Societatea Naiunilor i transmise guvernului romn, altele fiind dispoziii cu caracter general privind protecia minoritilor din Europa, altele au fost adrese ctre diferite persoane i instituii minoritare care au trimis petiii la Societatea Naiunilor. Publicaiile oficiale ale Ligii, ntre care Journal Officiel de la Socit des Nations sunt foarte utile n cercetarea temei. Adunrile generale, secretariatul Ligii, Comisia Minoritilor, Comitetele de Trei au fost instituiile care au fost chemate s ia decizii n problemele minoritare. O alt categorie de acte i documente, cri i articole au fost create de reprezentani ai minoritilor din statele care n anul 1919 semnaser aa-numitele Tratate ale minoritilor (Polonia, Cehoslovacia, Grecia, Iugoslavia i Romnia). Un mare numr de cri i articole au fost scrise i de ctre neutri. Opiniile lor difer, uneori i n funcie de orientarea lor politic i de sursele istorice folosite. O caracteristic general a lor este nefolosirea surselor primare romneti, elemente de fapt decisive n reconstituirea istoric. Nu este de mirare c unele abloane se transmit din lucrare n lucrare, fr a aduce de fapt ceva nou. Documentele diplomatice externe surse puin utilizate n scrierile pe tema minoritilor de limb, ras i religie se constituie n opinii presupus obiective cu privire la ansamblul societii romneti sau doar la unele aspecte29. Sistemul tratatelor ncheiate la Conferina de Pace de la Paris (1919-1920) a conferit Societii Naiunilor, ca instituie i colectivitate de membri, un rol important n chestiunea minoritilor etnice. Apare astfel firesc ca reprezentanii diplomatici acreditai n rile amintite s aib mereu ochii aintii spre o asemenea problematic, deosebit de complex i

uneori cu irumperi neateptate, surprinztoare. Cristalizarea opiniilor lor depindea de muli factori, asupra crora nu insistm aici. Oricum, ntlnirile cu reprezentani ai guvernului, ai partidelor politice, ai unor instituii culturale i religioase, parcurgerea presei, cltoriile n teritoriu, au fost modaliti certe de informare care au condus apoi la redactarea rapoartelor ctre superiorii lor. Literatura dedicat lucrrilor Conferinei de Pace, a diferitelor ei organisme este foarte vast30. Tocmai de aceea noi ne mrginim s reamintim c la 1 mai 1919 s-a nfiinat, n cadrul Conferinei de Pace, Comisia statelor noi i a minoritilor, pus sub preedinia lui Philippe Berthelot i format din reprezentanii Franei, Marii Britanii, Statelor Unite ale Americii, Italiei i Japoniei. Ea a elaborat aa-numitele Tratate ale minoritilor. Primul a fost semnat de Marile Puteri cu Polonia, la 28 iunie 1919, tratat pe care istoricul polonez Marian Drozdowski l-a numit Little Treaty of Versailles31. El va constitui modelul i pentru celelalte semnate ulterior. Cehoslovacia, Grecia i Polonia l-au semnat la 10 septembrie 1919, odat cu Tratatul cu Austria. Iugoslavia l-a semnat la 5 decembrie, iar Romnia la 9 decembrie 191932. n faa Comisiei amintite, la 10 mai, delegaiile evreieti au prezentat un amplu memoriu privind drepturile minoritilor etnice n general, avnd succinte referiri concrete la evreii din Romnia. Se apreciaz c demersurile diferitelor organizaii evreieti pe lng Conferina de Pace au contribuit, n mare msura, la elaborarea sistemului de protecie a minoritilor. Aceste iniiative, dei foarte importante, nu trebuie ns absolutizate. Protecia minoritilor ar fi fost oricum impus, ca o rezultant a ideilor wilsoniene i a principiului naionalitilor. Marile puteri intenionau s evite n timp declanarea unor conflicte interstatale care ar fi avut printre cauze i aspecte minoritare. Ele i bazau opiunea n primul rnd pe aportul hotrtor n obinerea victoriei finale i n al doilea rnd pe numrul relativ mare al minoritarilor etnici n statele nou create i care i-au extins suprafaa33. Cehoslovacia (34,6%), Polonia (31,2%), Romnia (28,8%) erau, n aceast ordine, rile n care procentul minoritarilor era cel mai mare. Romnia se afla cu un procent de 5,2 % mai mare dect media tuturor statelor incluse n tabel (23,6%). n privina numrului unei minoriti dintr-o ar, primele dou locuri sunt ocupate de ucrainienii (4.000.000) i evreii ( 3.006.000) din Polonia, maghiarii din Romnia situndu-se pe locul trei (1.900.000). Prin tratatul din 9 decembrie 1919, Romnia se angajeaz ca o parte din prevederile lui, i anume art. 2-8, s fie recunoscute ca legi fundamentale i c nici o dispoziie intern s nu vin n contradicie cu tratatul. Pe scurt, coninutul Tratatului era: statul romn se angaja s asigure protecia vieii, a libertii, liberul exerciiu al credinei, s recunoasc ca ceteni romni orice persoan domiciliat n ar, nscut (unguri i austrieci), precum i pe evreii de pe ntreg cuprinsul rii care nu se puteau prevala de alt cetenie: egalitatea n faa legii, etc. Articolul 11 se referea la acordarea autonomiei n ce privete chestiunile religioase i colare ale comunitilor sailor i secuilor. Constituia Romniei din anul 1923 prevedea o deplin egalitate pentru romni n sensul de ceteni romni indiferent de origine etnic, de limb sau religie n toate compartimentele sociale, economice, politice, culturale i religioase. Problema minoritilor din Romnia s-a plasat, deci, n contextul acestor acte juridice fundamentale interne i externe, la care s-au adugat legile speciale adoptate de statul romn, dispoziiile Consiliului Ligii Naiunilor cu privire la procedura de rezolvare a tuturor categoriilor de petiii, cereri, informri sau scrisori adresate forului internaional.

O chestiune extrem de important prezentat masiv n documente ale Ligii i care a generat o stufoas literatur istoric, a constituit-o procedura n materie de minoriti. George Sofronie, Nicolae Dacovici, Arthur de Balogh au elaborat i ei lucrri valoroase n domeniu. Tratatele au consacrat chestiunilor de procedur puin spaiu. n esen se conferea Consiliului Societii Naiunilor i Curii Permanente de Justiie Internaional de la Haga misiunea de a asigura executarea dispoziiilor nscrise n tratate. Reglementri ulterioare care s-au succedat pn n anul 1929 s-au constituit n ansamblul dispoziiunilor n materie. Noi evideniem doar faptul c prin Rezoluia Consiliului din 25 octombrie 1920 s-a instituit Comitetul de Trei, prima instan n procesul care se constituia ntre Consiliu i statul cu minoriti. El studia att petiiile minoritilor ct i rspunsul statului interesat i fcea recomandri Consiliului. n istoriografia romn sunt foarte puine cri i studii dedicate problematicii minoritilor etnice din Romnia n dezbaterile de la Societatea Naiunilor. n epoca comunist chestiunea minoritilor etnice din perioada interbelic a fost ceva aproape tabu. Astfel c i n scrieri dedicate raporturilor statului romn cu forul internaional de la Geneva aceste chestiuni sunt eludate. Considerentele de ordin politic au impus aceast cvasitcere a istoricilor cu privire la fapte i evenimente de o att de mare anvergur i complexitate. Ceea ce inem s subliniem pe baza cercetrilor fcute la Bucureti, Geneva, Londra i Budapesta este c raporturile guvernelor romne cu Societatea Naiunilor n acest domeniu au fost strnse, fr vreo urm de reinere sau de neglijare a sesizrilor sau nelmuririlor care parveneau de la Liga Naiunilor. Ele s-au exprimat n numeroasele ntlniri ale reprezentantului Romniei, Nicolae Petrescu-Comnen34, pe lng Lig, ale altor oficiali romni, n special Nicolae Titulescu i I. G. Duca., cu funcionari de la forul din Geneva, n noianul de documente pornite de la Geneva i Bucureti35. Un loc aparte l-au ocupat cltoriile de informare efectuate n Romnia la invitaia guvernelor romne, de preedinii Seciei administrative i a minoritilor, Erik Colban n anii 1923, 1924 i 1926 i Pablo de Azcarate n anii 1930 i 1932. Dac soluiile oferite de guvernele romne nu s-au bucurat ntotdeauna de aprecierea celor de la Geneva sau a minoritarilor care s-au adresat Ligii, dou lucruri nu se pot ns contesta: 1. Preocuparea constant a Societii Naiunilor i a guvernelor Romniei de a pune ntr-o concordan ct mai fireasc prevederile tratatelor minoritilor, ale Rezoluiilor Societii cu privire la minoritile etnice i la starea lor concret; 2. Dialogul, uneori eficient, al autoritilor romne cu reprezentani ai minoritilor. n cazul punctului 2 avem n vedere, de pild, consftuirile ntre cele dou pri amintite pe tot parcursul elaborrii legilor nvmntului primar (1924) i particular (1925), soldate cu rezultate notabile. Hans Otto Roth, deputat, ntr-o discuie cu I. G. Duca, preluat de consulul britanic la Bucureti, Herbert Dering, dup adoptarea primei legi, i-a declarat c, dei nu era pe deplin mulumit cu prevederile ei, sublinia: but had been reminded it that the Minorities had got 95% of their demands and that thus might therefore concede the remining 5%. This had been realized and further opposition had been withdrawn and the Bill had been passed36. Minoritarii din Romnia, ca i din celelalte state, i-au prezentat, n principal, punctele de vedere fa de statutul lor prin intermediul petiiilor trimise la Geneva37. Cele mai multe petiii au fost trimise de comunitatea german din Polonia i anume 100, n timp ce maghiarii din Romnia au redactat dup unele surse, 40 de petiii. n afara maghiarilor, din Romnia au mai ajuns la Lig i petiii ale ucrainenilor, ruilor, rutenilor, bulgarilor i germanilor. Ele au fost trimise de partide politice, instituii laice i bisericeti, de persoane private aparinnd minoritilor. n urma cercetrilor noastre am reuit s le depistm. Cunoatem

astfel coninutul lor, emitenii, observaiile guvernelor pe marginea lor i deciziile finale ale organismelor Ligii privind soluionarea lor. Problematica petiiilor a fost divers, ea exprimndu-se n chestiuni: * colare (legi colare, nchideri de coli, preluarea unor imobile care au aparinut minoritilor de ctre statul romn, ca succesor al statului maghiar; chestiunea bacalaureatului, a numrului de ore de limba romn n coli de stat sau particulare minoritare, insuficiena suportului financiar oferit de statul romn pentru coli); * bisericeti (exproprierea pmntului deinut de bisericile minoritare); * agrare (aplicarea reformei agrare, prevederile legii agrare, exproprierea de pmnturi arabile sau de pduri); * liberti individuale; * chestiuni legate de naionalitate; * revizuirea proprietii n Dobrogea de Sud. Activitatea efectiv a Societii Naiunilor a nceput la 10 ianuarie 1920. La scurt timp au ajuns la Lig numeroase acte trimise de persoane laice i bisericeti din ar i din strintate despre presupuse nerespectri din partea guvernului romn a tratatului minoritilor. n acest context, i ca urmare a unei practici instituite la Lig, Erik Colban, eful Seciilor administrativ i de Minoriti, a ntreprins n anul 1923 o prim vizit de informare n Romnia. n opinia celor de la Geneva asemenea demersuri erau utile pentru cunoaterea mai n profunzime i mai nuanat a unor realiti cunoscute de Societatea Naiunilor doar parial. Au urmat celelalte cltorii ale lui din anii 1924 i 1926, i ale lui Pablo Azcarate, noul ef al Comisiilor din anul 1927, din anii 1930 i 1932. Repetm caracterul lor de informare, fiindc amndoi au respectat obiectivele Societii Naiunilor de a nu le transforma n anchete pe teme minoritare, cum au sperat reprezentanii minoritilor. Mai mult, de fiecare dat cnd au sosit n Romnia ei au venit la invitaia guvernelor romneti. Chiar dac nu au fost lungi ca durat ele au fost dense i s-au strbtut distane nsemnate, mncnd i dormind de multe ori n tren. Din actele elaborate de ei rezult c s-au ntreinut cu un numr impresionant de persoane: Regele, Regina, prim-mintri, minitri, subsecretari de stat, directori i ali funcionari din ministere, prefeci, subprefeci, primari, oameni politici romni i minoritari, reprezentani ai mai multor culte, profesori, nvtori, rani constituie evantaiul de persoane cu care reprezentanii Ligii au discutat. Firete, ntrebrile au fost mai multe din partea oaspeilor. Au urmat lmuriri, justificri, prezentri de documente din partea oficialilor romni, dar i intervenii ale minoritarilor care i-au exprimat propriile lor nemulumiri. S-a discutat calm, deschis, politicos, fr rbufniri neavenite. n cltoriile din ar nu au ntlnit situaii tensionate, explozive care s conduc la conflicte interetnice. Mai ales printre oamenii de rnd domnea o atmosfer relaxant pentru vizitatori. Dac pe o hart a Romniei de atunci am puncta localitile mai importante strbtute de Colban i Azcarate, cititorul ar avea n fa orae ca: Bucureti, Sinaia, Braov, Sibiu, Cluj, Miercurea Ciuc, Gheorghieni, Odorhei, Aiud, Turda, Oradea, dar i locuri pitoreti ca Bile Tunad, Bile Felix, Lacul Rou Impresioneaz cu totul deosebit cultura lor, cunoaterea limbilor strine, ceea ce le-a permis ca n scurt timp s se familiarizeze cu o tematic vast i n mare parte necunoscut. Cu siguran, pregtirea lor prealabil la Geneva i experiena dobndit n alte ri le-a fost de mare ajutor.

n afara Vechiului Regat, n documente apar n afara Transilvaniei, i Bucovina i Basarabia, regiuni n care elementul romnesc este predominant, aproape copleitor n Basarabia. Rapoartele din anii 1923 i 1930 sunt ceva mai generale fa de cele din 1924, 1926 (lucrurile au fost consemnate de un romn, Vasile Stoica i trimise la Geneva lui Colban) i 1932. Reforma agrar, legile colare din anii 1924 i 1925, chestiunea finanrii de ctre stat a colilor i bisericilor minoritare, problema Bunurilor private din Ciuc, cea a libertilor politice sunt fenomene controversate n istoriografie. Noi nu ne-am propus o analiz aprofundat a lor, fiind contieni de faptul c un mare numr de documente, mai ales de arhiv, pe aceste teme, nu sunt nc n circuitul istoric. n multe privine documentele din volum vorbesc ele. Bibliografia pe care o prezentm l va ajuta i ea pe cititor s se informeze, s cunoasc opinii i analize contradictorii.

NOTE 1. Sabin Manuil, p. 3; Silviu Dragomir, p. 42-45. 2. Varjassy, Lajos, p. 19. 3. John M. Cabot, p. 59, 63-65, 82, 84, 86-88; Istoria Romniei. Transilvania, vol. II, p. 175-616; Dumitru Suciu, Antecedentele, XXX, Idem, Micarea antidualist. 4. Pter Pstor, p. 165. 5. 1918 la romni, p. 1. 6. P. Pstor, p. 166. 7. Gh. Iancu, G. Cipianu, p. 124. 8. Charles Vilain, p. 20-42. 9. Gh. Iancu, The Ruling, p. 17. 10. G. Sofronie, Lautodtermination, p. 62. 11. Ormos Mria, p. 63 i urmtoarele; Bogdan Krizman, p. 67-82; Gh. Iancu, G. Cipianu, La consideration. 12. Gh. Iancu, The Ruling, p. 21. 13. Ibidem. 14. Lengyel Zsolt K., p. 111-113. 15. Ibidem, p. 115. 16. Ibidem, p. 115-116. Din cele 5 cantoane doar n cte unul se crea o majoritate romneasc, sseasc i romno-sseasc. Competenele guvernului maghiar rmn considerabile. 17. Ibidem, p. 116-117. 18. Ormos Mria, p. 253-254. 19. Romsics Ignc, p. 75-77; Pomog Bela, p. 82-87. 20. Mik, I., p. 11-12. 21. Fr. Teutsch; C. Gllner, Die Stellungnahme; Cornelius R. Zach, Der Status, p. 233-239; V. Ciobanu, Contribuii, p. 29-68; H. Roth, Abschlissender, p. 55-66; Idem, Der Deutsch, Gh. Iancu, Contribuii, p. 76-82; Idem, Ruling, p. 70-78; Idem, Die Haltung. 22. Fr. Teutsch, p. 271. 23. Gh. Iancu, G. Cipianu, p. 236. 24. Siebenbrgische Deutsches Tageblatt, nr. 13987 din 22 octombrie 1919. 25. Dezbaterile Adunrii Deputailor 1919-1920, p. 181-182. 26. S. Bocu, p. 161. 27. M. Kausch; Gh. Iancu, Die politische Haltung. 28. Gh. Iancu, The Ruling, p. 78-84. 29. Gh. Iancu, Imagini. Vezi i rapoartele nc nepublicate de noi ale consulilor britanici de la Bucureti i Cluj, descoperite la Londra, dedicate minoritilor naionale din Romnia.

30. Bibliographisches Handbuch este un volum de excepional valoare tiinific pentru tematica minoritior. De aceea lista noastr cu titlurile crilor i a articolelor nu va fi prea lung. 31. M. Drozdowski, p. 226 i urmtoarele. 32. Galantai face o prezentare a etapelor parcurse de fiecare tratat, a coninutului lor, a punctelor comune i a diferenelor dintre ele. 33. n lucrarea lui Galantai, p. 14-16, sunt nirate urmtoarele ri cu procente de minoriti: Finlanda (11,3%), Estonia (12%), Letonia (26%), Lituania (19,8%), Danzing (4,1%), Polonia (31,2%), Cehoslovacia (34,6%), Austria (3,3%), Ungaria (10,4%), Romnia (28,8%), Iugoslavia (20,7%), Albania (8,8%), Bulgaria (16%), Grecia (7%), Turcia zona european (20,2%). 34. Numire adus la cunotina lui de ctre I. G. Duca, ministrul de externe, la 8 august 1923. Arhiva Ministerului de Externe al Romniei, Bucureti, fondul Geneva, vol. 2, f. 156. 35. Vezi pe larg, Mouton i fondul i dosarul citat mai sus. 36. Public Record Office, London, Foreign Office, dosar 371/1997, f. 101-102. 37. Herbert V. Truhart, G. Kver, Histoire; Idem, Genve; T. Veiter, p. 20-35; Gh. Iancu, Protecia, p. 101-103.

1. ERIK COLBAN

PRELIMINARY NOTES (1923)

CONFIDENTIAL To: Secretary-General [of the League of Nation] Herewith my preliminary notes, kept in the form of a diary, on my journey to Romania. It is my intention, when I have received M. Azcarates and M. Hodens notes, to prepare a new and shorter paper, which might eventually be given out privately to some of the Members of the Council. This paper cannot, however, be ready until some time next week, when I propose to submit it to you. E. C. 13 / 8 / 23 * ** We arrived at Bucharest on July 24th, about 8 in the evening, and were received at the station by M. Jancovici, who is the Romanian delegate on the Temporary Mixed Commission and on the Committee for the Allocation of the Expenses of the League, and by M. Diano, Counselor of Legation in the Foreign Ministry, and M. Lecca, First Secretary in the same Ministry. We were taken to the hotel, where M. Arion, the Head of the Press Section of the Foreign Ministry, met us and told us that the Secretary-General of the Foreign Ministry, M. Filodor, was desirous of seeing us for dinner. The dinner took place in quite an informal way and a feeling of ease and cordiality was established after a few minutes. It was, however, obvious that the Romanians present (M. Filodor, M. Arion, M. Diano and M. Lecca) did not in the beginning know exactly what to expect from us and what might be in our minds. I therefore took the opportunity, when M. Filodor asked me after some few minutes what was our programme for out visit here, of explaining, as I had done in Lausanne to M. Diamandy, and previously to M. Titulesco, that we placed ourselves entirely at the disposal of the Romanian Government, that we had felt some lack of contact, and considered it most desirable that greater liaison should be established. I said that I hoped that M. Filodor, who had at his disposal all the Legations and

Consulates of Romania, would find it in the interests of his country also to include the headquarters of the League of Nations in the list of institutions useful to his country. Not only could the Secretariat, if sufficiently enlightened on Romanian questions, collaborate with the Romanian Government in making Romanian politics more appreciated all round the world, but out technical experts on all subjects might perhaps be able to render Romania considerable service. We were all keen to be as useful as possible and I hoped that M. Filodor and his Government would look upon the officials of the Secretariat as being quite as much at their disposal as at the disposal of any other Government. M. Filodor asked whether we intended to go to Transylvania. I said that that of course depended upon what the Romanian Government thought wise, but it would certainly be very helpful for us in the Secretariat of the League to know the country as well as possible, so as to be able to understand as thoroughly as possible all the different and rather complex problems of Romanian politics. It was my experience that, however good might be the written material on which I tried to come to an understanding of the problems of foreign countries, it was always of the greatest help to know the country itself. Even though a visit to Transylvania would necessarily be superficial and of short duration, it would certainly enable me later on to appreciate better that I had perhaps hitherto done the whole position of that part of Romania. When the Romanian Government wrote exposs on their different problems, they naturally took for granted many things, which were perhaps not known in the same way to foreigners. It was therefore quite possible that even the best Romanian expos did not take into due account the lack of knowledge and of understanding their questions which obtained abroad. Many misunderstandings might be done away with if the officials of the Secretariat of the League could enter into close contact with Romania and learn to see things in the light of the fullest understanding, which only personal contact could bring about. M. Arion made some remark on the Minorities problem, and I said that as he had brought it up I did not see any reason to hide my opinion on that subject, which was that at the peace settlement it had not been possible to carry out with all its consequences the principle of selfdetermination, and that therefore a considerable number of persons belonging to racial, religious or linguistic minorities found themselves placed under a sovereignty other than the one they might perhaps have chosen for themselves. This created a situation, which invited irredentism and interference by neighbouring countries or by the Great Powers. History showed that such a position had been very dangerous to the preservation of the full sovereignty of the States of Eastern and Central Europe, and I thought that the arrangement under which the difficulties arising out of the presence on the territory of the new or enlarged States of considerable Minorities should be dealt with by the League of Nations was a very happy solution. The League of Nations, so to speak, canalised all these difficulties and prevented the neighbouring States and Great Powers from taking a strong, independent and hostile action. It was obvious to me that the League could not assist the Minorities in any action contrary to the unity and consolidation of the State. The loyalty of the persons belonging to the Minorities was essential. It was important to remember that the Minorities Treaties only spoke about racial, religious and linguistic minorities and that political minorities and social minorities were not as such the object of any League protection. What I hoped would happen was that the different interested Governments might see their way to create each on their own soil such conditions for their Minorities that irredentism would not be fomented and that after a few years, perhaps a very few years, the Minorities problem would be no problem any more in most of these countries. Briefly, the Minorities problem

was one aspect of the frontier problem, and protection of Minorities meant to strengthening of the frontiers as laid down by the Treaties. M. Filodor seemed well pleased with most of what I said and after a while spoke with much greater frankness than at the beginning. He said that it was the desire of the Ministry that we should see as much as possible, so as to be able to judge conditions in Romania independently. Also M. Arion insisted over and over again on the necessity for us to go to the different parts of the country, speak to everybody, and make our own independent opinion. He felt sure that this opinion would on the whole be favourable to Romania. M. Lecca took the same line. He would not, he said, say that such and such a Romanian thesis was right. He only wanted me to take whatever criticism or complaint there might be, go to the spot, make my own investigations and then tell him what I thought of it. He did not ask for anything more than that the problems of his country be fully understood. I said that he touched an important point and that, as a matter of fact, the complete understanding of the many difficult problems arising out of the war was most necessary for the officials of the Secretariat of the League of Nations if we should hope to deal with these problems successfully. I could assure him that I realised to the full the enormous difficulties, which had arisen for the Romanian Government out of the war and from the taking over of great provinces. Here M. Filodor intervened and said that it was not exactly the taking over of new provinces, but had only accepted the union with the free will of their inhabitants. I said that I was aware of the Alba Julia Congress, and that I did not at all mean that the Romanian Government had acquired the new provinces in contradiction with the wishes of the majority of the inhabitants. When I said taking over, it was only a technical expression, meaning that Romania had extended her sovereignty of these provinces; and to revert to what I had just said I would like to state that it had always been my opinion that it was terribly difficult to administer the new provinces with their mixed populations immediately after a great war, and without having from the beginning the necessary cadres and of officials of the necessary financial basis. I therefore was far more prone to admire the constructive work already done that to underline what might in some cases have been done differently. It was the general tendency in the policy of the Government that counted in my eyes. We also spoke quite a lot about propaganda work to be done. It was agreed that M. Hoden should go to see M. Arion, and discuss with him the possibility of a closer liaison between the Information Section of the Secretariat and the Press Section of the Foreign Ministry here. Another question touched upon was the position of Bessarabia. M. Lecca explained to me that the mass of the inhabitants of Bessarabia were Romanian and that the Russian element was very small. The only Minority of some importance was constituted by Jews, who, however, seemed quite happy about the new state of affairs. M. Lecca, during an excursion we had next day with him, the came back to the Bessarabian question and explained to me that this question did not constitute any problem of difficulty for Romania as long as Russia did not reopen her former policy of trying to bring a bridge down to Constantinople over Romanian territory, but Russia would never have any sound pretext based upon nationality considerations. Bessarabia was old Romanian territory, taken by force by Russia by the Treaty of Berlin, and restored to Romania now exactly within her previous boundaries. E. C. 25 / 7 / 23

* ** In the morning of July 25th, M. Hoden went to the Foreign Ministry, to discuss with M. Arion the question of liaison between the Information Section of the Secretariat and the Press and Propaganda Section of the Foreign Ministry. The other members of the Secretariat spent the morning in the company of M. Lecca, sight-seeing. M. Lecca and M. Diano took us out to lunch. M. Hoden lunched privately with M. Jancovici. At 3. 30 in the afternoon, M. Hoden, M. Azcarate and I went to see Foreign Minister Duca, accompanied by M. Lecca and Diano. We were received by him in the most cordial way and he repeated over and over again during our 3/4 hr. conversation his pleasure at seeing us in Romania and his desire that we should obtain the fullest possible information on everything of interest. M. Duca did not give any of us much opportunity of talking, having himself obviously prepared a general expose, which he delivered with much force and in a very convincing tone. He started by asking whether we had made any program. I said that we were at the disposal of his Government and he replied smilingly that of course that was so, but he wanted to be sure that we should be absolutely satisfied with the arrangements he was going to suggest. He then suggested that we should be to see on the spot the conditions of the different Minorities in Transylvania, stopping 1 or 2 days at each place, the whole trip to last about a week after having left Sinaia and before reaching Arad. I told him that the program he had outlined was exactly the one we had ourselves considered as the ideal one and that we were very glad to see that it corresponded with his own views. M. Duca added that in order to make the journey as fruitful to us as possible in so few days he had asked his colleagues the Ministers of Public Worship and Public Instruction to receive us the same afternoon and give us all kinds of useful information. He would also attach to us two junior officials of the Foreign Ministry, MM. Lecca and Diano. I expressed again my great satisfaction. (During dinner the same evening M. Duca also said that he would attach to us the Director for church Questions and School Questions to go with us on our journey). He asked whether we would dine with him that evening, in the company of some few officials of the Ministry and leave for Sinaia the next afternoon. I gladly accepted this and he added that perhaps I would like to stay long enough at Sinaia to have an opportunity of shaking hands with Dr. Benes and M. Nintchitch. He also asked what were my intentions with regard to the Royal Family. I answered that I had thought that the Royal Family was very busy just now because of the Sinaia Conference, and that I had thought it right to enter our names in the book at the Palais Royal without expecting any further development. He said that that was a good plan, but he would consider whetwer it was not possible to arrange for an audience with the King. (The same night at the dinner party he told me that we should be expected to lunch with the Royal Family on Saturday next). M. Duca said that to his mind there were different Minorities to be considered: the Magyars, the Germans and the Jews. He had given instructions that the necessary general information on the position of these Minorities should be placed at my disposal. (As a matter of fact, before we left he handed me certain documents on this subject). As for the Magyar Minorities, which presented perhaps the greatest difficulty, the problem was threefold: Church

Questions, School and Language Questions and Agrarian Reform. As to the latter, he thought that after the discussion on the optants question at Geneva, and in view of all the information already given by the Romanian Government, there was very little for him to add. If I wanted to see his colleague the Minister of Agriculture, nothing would be easier than to arrange an interview, but he thought it would be useless. I agreed that we already were in possession of all the information we needed at present. As for the two other groups of questions, I said that it would be very helpful to see his two colleagues the Minister for Public Worship and Public Instruction. He asked me frankly to put questions to them and always to remember that it was in the interests of the Romanian Government that we should get to the bottom of the matter and be able to form for ourselves a well founded and independent opinion. Although somewhat outside the immediate purpose of my visit, I grasped the opportunity he gave of mentioning Bessarabia, and asked for his view on the Bessarabian problem. He said that I could be quite sure that the Bessarabian population was thoroughly Romanian. Bessarabia was an old Romanian province and the inhabitants were by no means Russian. If I crossed the frontier between the old Romania and Bessarabia without being aware of the fact of so doing, I should not see any difference between the costumes and habits, or hear any difference between the language[s] of the population on the two sides. The peasants of Bessarabia were all thoroughly Romanian. In the towns of course there was a remnant of Russians from the time when Bessarabia had been under Russian domination. In the towns I should also find a considerable minority composed of Jews, who, however, were by no means hostile to Romania. When Russia (I believe he said in the time of Peter the Great) had tried to colonize Bessarabia, she had not brought in Russians, but Tartars and Germans from the south. The result was that in Bessarabia the Russian element was of no consequence at all. M. Duca added that he was most desirous that I should find time to come back and go to Bessarabia and study conditions there. Then we went to see the Minister for Public Worship, M. Banu. He was assisted by 2 or 3 gentlemen, one of whom, the Secretary- General of the Ministry, a very courteous and friendly man speaking excellent French (as of course do most of the Romanians we deal with), took pencil notes busily during my conversation with the Minister. The Minister started by asking me to put questions to him. The rather large number of people present made it of course impossible for me to establish any useful discussion on questions of detail and I embarked on a general line, explaining the desire of the members of the Secretariat to make themselves as useful as possible to the Romanian Government, the utility our technical organizations might have for that country, etc., etc. I finally touched upon the Minorities problem, and said that in regard to this question also, I myself and my colleagues would be very glad if the Romanian Government would avail itself of our services to make their policy known in the countries of the world. I said that up to now in the Minorities Section of the Secretariat we had been obliged, by force of circumstances, to deal with Minorities questions to a great extent on the basis of complaints received. This, I thought, was bad, and it was much more desirable, as had more over been indicated by the 3rd Assembly, to establish a close and friendly relationship with the Governments concerned, in order to enable the Secretariat to place before the Members of the Council and of the League useful information with regard to all sides of the Minorities problem in the different countries, not forgetting that particular aspect of the problem which related to the behavior of the Minorities themselves towards their new States. The Minister briefly explained that full freedom of conscience prevailed in Romania and was guaranteed by the Constitution. As for the Minorities

Churches, their expenses of all kinds were covered by the Government at least in due proportion to the payment made by the State towards the expenses of the Orthodox Church, to which belonged the immense majority of the inhabitants of Greater Romania. He asked whether I had any questions of detail to put. I said that at present I thought the more important thing was to know and to understand fully the policy of the Romanian Government towards the different religious Minorities. It had always been very difficult for me to appreciate the explanations given by the Romanian Government in answer to certain complaints because I had not had before me a general picture of the situation giving with figures the position at the end of the war, the actual position and the intentions of the Government for the future. In his Ministry from time to time contemplated, as I thought might well be the case, giving foreign public opinion an opportunity of learning what had already been achieved in Romania, and what were the aims of the Romanian Government in ecclesiastical matters, it would be of the utmost value to the Secretariat to have copies of such notes. I emphasized quite strongly the desirability of the Ministry taking, so to speak, the offensive, and not sitting on the fence waiting for the Minorities to bring up complaints. The Minister seemed to appreciate everything I said, and after about 3/4 hr. conversation, during which nobody but he and I had spoken, we left his office. Our next visit was to the Minister of Public Instruction, M. Anghelesco. He was assisted by his Director for Minorities Schools, (M. Pteancu). He heard with slight impatience my short introductory speech, which was of course very much on the same lines as what I had already said to the other Romanians. He then started his own expos, which obviously was very well prepared, and for which he was very anxious to have as much time as possible to deliver and explain. This expos generally contained the same statements as we know from the observations of the Romanian Government on the Sicule Societys petition (C. 195. M. 116, 1923. I), giving figures concerning Romanian, Hungarian and German schools (private and public) before the war and at the present time. I put just tentatively one single question, namely with regard to the complaint that the Romanian Government was preventing Minorities of Hungarian language from going to Hungarian confessional schools because of their belonging to another confession. He answered that the fact was correct and that he himself had issued a decree to this effect. It was however necessary to understand the conditions: there were a great number of Jews in Romania, who considered themselves as good Romanians and loyal citizens, and did not at all want to be mixed up with other Minorities. Now by the incorporation of Transylvania in Greater Romania a number of Jews of Hungarian tongue had come under Romanian sovereignty. These Jews were given the opportunity of choosing between Romanian schools with Romanian language as the language of instruction on the one side, and Jewish schools with Hebrew or Yiddish as the language of instruction on the other side. The Hungarians complained against this, saying that these Jews were Hungarian and should be considered as such and allowed to go to the Hungarian confessional schools. This alternative was not accepted by the Government and the Minister (if I did not misunderstand him) said that the Jewish Organisation in Bucharest agreed with him that there was no reason to allow these Jews to send their children to Hungarian schools. To my further question the Minister explained that this rule only applied in the case of Jews of Hungarian language who wanted to obtain for their children a Romanian public school certificate, and they were not prevented from using the Hungarian language in private schools if they renounced the right to obtain such certificates. (I put this question twice or three times but do not still feel quite certain that the Minister fully understood my question or whether I

fully understood his reply). The Minister also said that the rule under which the children of Hungarian speaking Jews should receive instruction in Romanian would only apply as from last year to the first school year, from this to the second, from next to the third, and that, consequently, children belonging to previous school years continued to receive instruction in Hungarian. He emphasized that the measure touched only a very small fraction of the Jewish Minorities in Hungary. If I understood him correctly, he said that an analogous situation did not exist in respect of Hungarians of Magyar race and of different faith. My impression was that the Minister, although extremely courteous and very willing to discuss, was nevertheless not quite pleased with giving explanations. He rather overemphasized his willingness to do it, and time after time said that I could have all the statistics and documents I wanted, so as to be able to judge and control whether his statements were right or wrong. I said that of course there was no question of discussing, or in any way doubting the accuracy of the information given by the Romanian Government. The point was that many things were obvious to that Government and their experts which international officials and foreign Governments called upon take an interest in these questions might not know or be able to appreciate. My aim was to gain such personal knowledge of the problems and of the way in which the Romanian Government considered them as might enable me usefully to assist in explaining the real position to anybody concerned. I should therefore feel very much obliged to the Minister if he would let me have the statistics and other material which he had mentioned were at my disposal, and I should also be very grateful if in the future the Secretariat of the League of Nations could be kept informed. I said that I thought that it was in Romanias own interests to explain her policy in this and similar questions by taking as a starting point the situation immediately after the war, and then showing how her different institutions had been built up to now and what were her intentions for the future development of these institutions. To consider the position of the different races in Transylvania as a problem similar to the problem of dealing with the different races living together in London was obviously impossible. The practical difficulties of the Romanian Government had to be taken into account, and no unbiased onlooker would fail to grant Romania her due praise for the tremendous effort I was sure she had made since the war to deal with the numerous and most difficult problems with which she was faced. The great thing was to look forward, and not to be hampered by previous occurrences. It was the general tendency of the Romanian Government in dealing with their Minorities which was of international interest, and the League of Nations to my mind would be ill-advised if it made a point of taking up all kinds of unavoidable incidents in which perhaps, technically speaking, an infraction of existing rules might be said to have taken place. The Minister finally informed me that, at the request of his colleague the Minister for Foreign Affairs, he would ask his Director for School Questions (or perhaps it was for Minorities School Questions) to go with us to Transylvania, so as to be able to assist us at all times. The same evening (yesterday) we dined with M. Duca, M. Jancovici, M. Arion, M. Lecca, M. Diano and other members of the Foreign Ministry, and the General Inspector of the Ministry of Public Instruction (M. Pteancu). M. Duca infomed me that M. Pteancu would go with us on our journey, to assist us in all questions concerning churches, as would also the Director from the Ministry of Public Worship, who, being already engaged, had not been able to come to dinner.

During dinner, a number of general and particular questions were discussed, sometimes in general discussion, sometimes in more private conversations between 2 or 3 of those present. M. Duca said that there was one question he had not mentioned when we had seen him in the afternoon the question of the political collaboration of the Minorities. It was true that the Hungarian Minorities had far less representation in Parliament than that to which, according to their numerical position, they were entitled, but this, he emphasized strongly, was not the fault of the Romanian Government but of the Hungarians themselves. They had not wanted to collaborate, and had not put up candidates for election. I said that I had read in Hungarian complaints that the Romanian authorities had rendered difficult the acceptance of Hungarian candidates. M. Duca said this was certainly an unjustified complaint, as, on the contrary, the Romanian Government had done their utmost to get at any rate some few Hungarians elected. It was the sincere desire of the Romanian Government to have all the Minorities duly represented in Parliament. In the afternoon, when I returned from our different talks I found a note from M. Etienne de Ugron, former Hungarian Minister Plenipotentiary, in which he said that as he happened to hear of our presence in Bucharest and being the President of the Hungarian party in Romania, he placed himself at my disposal should I wish to be put in touch with members of the Hungarian Minorities. He asked for the reply to be sent him eventually to the room of the Spanish Minister, who lived in the hotel where we were staying. I now told M. Duca of the request of M. Ugron and asked what kind of a man he was. M. Duca said that he belonged to the type of man of Count Bethlen and Count Banffy previous great landowners in Transylvania and rather intransigent in their views. If I wanted to see him, there was no objection on the part of M. Duca. I said that I did not in the least personally desire to see him, but if M. Duca agreed, I would receive him the next morning, thank him for his friendly offer to put me in touch with the Hungarian Minorities, but tell him that this was quite superfluous as M. Duca himself had arranged for all the necessary to be done. M. Duca agreed. M. Duca told me that he had arranged that we should lunch with the King during our stay in Sinaia. I thanked him very much for all he had done to make our visit so agreeable and said that I hoped that the work I was going to do might prove useful to Romania also. M. Duca said that as I had suggested when seeing him in the afternoon that the Delegation could either go back to Bucharest from Arad or proceed thence to Geneva, and as I had said that he might perhaps want me to come back even if the others went home, he would now arrange to be in Bucharest for a day when I came back. He fully agreed that the others might proceed from Arad to Geneva. M. Duca also said that the necessary material arrangements were made for our journey from Bucharest to Sinaia, and on, for which I again expressed my thanks. Incidentally, I should mention that I have the impression that information on the views which I and the other members of the Secretariat express is reported immediately to the Foreign Minister, and that he takes the greatest interest in everything concerning us. He also, during the dinner party, insisted upon his great satisfaction that we had come and that expected that the liaison between the Romanian Government and the Secretariat was now finally established. E. C. 26 / 7 / 23

* ** This morning, July 26, M. Ugron came to see me, and I said, in accordance with what I had agreed with M. Duca last night, that although I was very grateful for his kind offer of introducing me to the Hungarian Minorities, I thought this was not needed as M. Duca had already made the necessary arrangements for me to see such persons as I could desire to meet this time. I added that I would like to use the opportunity of correcting a slight misconception arising from his note to me of yesterday, namely that I was the President of a Delegation sent out by the League of Nations to make an enquiry on Minorities questions. As a matter of fact, no Delegation existed, and no enqute was contemplated, unless he would use that word for the work of personal examination of conditions in Romania, which my colleagues and were now undertaking. He said that he certainly had misunderstood the position, but would nevertheless have like to place himself at our disposal should it be needed. He added, and with great emphasis, that I might tell M. Duca of his demarche, as he did not want to do anything not known to the Romanian Government. He would also underline that he and his friends in Transylvania had no better intention than to be loyal citizens of the Romanian State. They could not forget the country to which they had previously belonged, and it would be undignified if they did so, but I might be assured that they accepted present conditions as a fact not to be disputed, and would do their best to behave as loyal Romanian citizens; only they must claim respect for their Magyar traditions, language, religion and schools. As for their material welfare, certain governmental measures had interfered very strongly with that, but he would not enter upon that now as he had already said the more important thing. I thanked him very much for his courtesy and, in reply to his question, said that it was probable that we should go to Cluj, but that I did not as yet know the date when we should arrive there. He said that if only he could know that a little beforehand, he would be very glad to come down to the town to assist us. He lived somewhat outside. We lunched with M. Jancovici at his house. Besides the members of the Secretariat, there were present M. Goga, and M. Gongopol, chief editor of the newspaper ndreptarea. I had a long talk with M. Goga (previously Minister of Public Worship), a man of Transylvanian birth. He seemed very pleased with the general remarks I made as to the Leagues policy in Minorities questions, and expressed the hope of seeing us again at Cluj, where he would be in some few days. I said that I would consult with the members of the Foreign Ministry who were to go with us so as to arrange, if possible, that we might meet him there. He belonged to the party of the Opposition and is considered as a certain candidate for the post of Foreign Minister when the present Ministry comes to an end. By the way, M. Jancovici himself belongs to the same party of the Opposition, but has obviously collaborated very intimately with M. Duca with regard to the arrangements for our ... here. I believe that it is in great part due to him that we have been exceedingly well received. We left Bucharest at 2 p. m. for Sinaia, accompanied by M. Lecca and Diano. I assume the two Directors from the Ministries of Public Worship and Public Instruction will join us at Sinaia. All our ordinary hotel bills have been paid by the Romanian Government. I have personally thanked M. Duca, and shall of course not forget when I return to Bucharest to express the gratitude of the Secretariat for the great attention paid us by the Romanian Government.

As to the representation of Romania on the staff of the Secretariat, I considered it unwise to bring up that question now, seeing that I shall return alone later on. Such a question is much more easily dealt with under four eyes, and I have had as yet little or no opportunity for even a short private talk with anybody. We arrived at Sinaia in the afternoon and called shortly afterwards at the Palais Royal, to note our names there. No other official function took place in the afternoon. We had dinner in the hotel with M. Arion as host, and MM. Lecca and Diano. There was no discussion of particular interest. E. C. 26 / 7 / 23 * ** On July 27th, we had an excursion in automobile to the petrol fields down in the valley leading from Bucharest to Sinaia. M. Lecca was with us. Just before lunch, he introduced me to another man who was visiting the petrol fields, and who was the Romanian Minister for Bucovine affairs. I had a long and very interesting talk with him during luncheon. He told me that the Cabinet had special Ministers for Bucovine affairs, for Transylvanian affairs and for the affairs of the Banat. He himself was of Bucovine origin. The Bucovine population was somewhat over one million; of these about 10, 000 were Magyars. The Magyar Minority were very good citizens, absolutely loyal and appeared very satisfied with their position. No irredentism existed. These Bucovine Magyars had never been in close contact with the Magyars of Transylvania. Another Minority, which also seemed to be quite happy in Bucovina was the German one. These Minorities received preliminary instruction in their own language, and public instruction was now quite well developed in the country, but as the result of previous conditions, only about 60% of the population could read and write. In the years to come, when the children grew up, the position would of course be quite different. The Church question did not give rise to any real difficulty in Bucovina. Sufficient funds for the needs of the Church were available. The Jewish population, which was quite considerable, namely about one-seventh of the total, had monopolised the commercial life. A certain part of the population was of Ruthene race, and some of them had wished the country to be incorporated in a greater Ukraine, but generally the Ruthenes of Bukovina were satisfied with their present position. As for the economic conditions of Bucovina, the country had suffered considerably during the war having been occupied by different armies in succession. A serious effort had however been made to put things straight, and the present outlook was very good. The main occupation of the inhabitants was agriculture and wood industries. Incorporation in the Greater Romania had considerable economic advantages for Bucovina, as although her agriculture was quite well developed, she was unable to feed herself and needed to import a considerable amount of cereals a year. This she could now get from Bessarabia without being hampered by differences in currency or customs formalities. On the other hand, the main export article of Bucovina products of forestry was needed in Bessarabia. The country was very densely populated, indeed more so than any other part of the present Romanian State, but only about one-quarter was cultivated. Another quarter was covered by forest.

The oil industry did not as yet exist in the country, but investigations were now being made to find out whether any oil existed, and could be exploited. The agrarian reform had been executed in Bucovina as elsewhere in Romania, but very few latifundia had existed there. The Press of Bukovina consisted of a number of papers in different languages. Newspapers were not read much outside the towns and much had still to be done to arouse the interests of the population to participate in affairs outside their own immediate sphere. The same evening it had been arranged that we should dine at the Casino with MM. Lecca and Diano, but just before dinner M. Diano told me that M. Duca, who had arrived from Bucharest, invited us to dine with him and Madame Duca and some few officials from the Foreign Ministry. This we did and conversation was still more unreserved than on previous occasions, and absolutely friendly. I sat between Madame Duca and M. Arion, and Madame Duca spoke of the great sufferings of Romania during the war and of the great effort made to re-establish better conditions. M. Arion, on his side, told me of the great satisfaction he felt with the opinions I had expressed on Minorities problems in general. M. Hoden later one told me that M. Arion had also expressed to him his great satisfaction, and said that they had thought in Bucharest that the League of Nations had quite another conception of the Minorities problem than they had learnt from me was the case. M. Duca told M. Hoden during dinner that M. Titulesco had agreed to represent Romania at the Assembly. I also reminded M. Duca of the great desirability of his coming to the Assembly, and when M. Hoden said that it would not be necessary for him to stay the whole time of the Assembly, I said that I thought that perhaps from about the 10th to the 15th or 18th September might be the best time, if M. Duca could not afford to give his personal attention to the whole period of the Assembly. After dinner I met M. le Comte de Manneville, French Minister to Romania, whom I had previously met at the Quai dOrsay about a year ago. I had then tried to impress upon him the necessity of the French Government taking more interest in the Minorities problem of Eastern and Central Europe. He had heard of my presence in Sinaia and had sent me his card. He reminded me of what I had told him at the Quai dOrsay, and said that I was right in attaching great importance to the Minorities problem. I said that of course he reported on these problems to his Government, but if I might be allowed to say so, it would be desirable in making his reports if he would consider in particular the need of the French Delegation to the Council and the Assembly of the League of Nations to be informed on these delicate questions, so as to be able to represent France with the fullest possible understanding and in possession of all relevant facts. M. de Manneville seemed to appreciate this point. He asked whether we would receive copies of his reports at Geneva. M. Hoden, who was present at this conversation, said, and I agreed with him, that of course this was not necessary. The important point was that Frances own representation on the League should be well informed, so as to be able to give the most efficient collaboration to the other Members of the League. After dinner I also had a talk with M. Filodor, Secretary-General of the Foreign Ministry. He was very friendly and I believe that reports have been brought to him every day of what the members of the Secretariat have said during the last couple of days. He felt sure that I should see everything possible to see and hear everything possible to hear during the few days at my disposal. He mentioned the Bessarabian problem, and he joined in the desire expressed by the Foreign Minister that I should go there as soon as possible, E. C.

28 / 7 / 23 * ** This morning, July 28th, M. Hoden went to see M. Jouvenel, who informed him that he had been asked to be the suppliant of M. Bourgeois as French Delegate to the Assembly, and that he had accepted this. The rest of us went for a walk up in the hills, and on our return, I went to call on MM. Benes and Nintchitch. I met MM. Duca and Benes in a car, just entering the Villa Dacia, and as I went in and asked if I could leave cards for MM. Benes and Nincthitch, M. Duca came out and said that M. Benes certainly wanted to shake hands, but as it was already 5 to 12 and M. Benes had to be at the Palais Royal at 12, there would not be much time. M. Benes came, and was, as usual, extremely cordial. He said that they were going to do good work at Sinaia. During the couple of minutes I waited for him to come out, M. Duca once more repeated and underlined his pleasure at seeing me in Romania, and his hope that what could be done on the part of the Romanian Government to render my work easy would prove adequate. He asked me to stick to the opinion I had already expressed that conditions in Romania had to be examined in the light of the conditions prevailing immediately after the war, and perhaps it was not unjust also even to ask that it should be remembered that Romania had been in very rapid development also in the period before the war, and had made the greatest effort to meet the requirements of modern times. M. Benes left with au revoir Genve, and M. Duca wished me welcome to Bucharest when our journey to the western provinces of Romania was finished. I left a card for M. Nintchitch. I could not ask for him, as it was already late and time to dress for the luncheon at the Palais Royal. There were present at the luncheon at the Palais Royal, M. Constantinescu, Minister of Agriculture, an old Romanian politician, said to be rather of the reactionary type, an American journalist and his Secretary, the members of the Secretariat (inclusive of Miss Harris, although her name had not been entered in the book of the Queen), M. Miu, the Court Minister and previously Romanian Minister in London, whom I know as a very intimate friend of the family of the Norwegian Minister there, a Lady-in-Waiting (Miss Cantemir), the Court Doctor, an officer in attendance, and MM. Lecca and Diano. M. Constantinescu was seated at the right of the Queen, I myself at her left and Miss Harris at the right of the King. Before entering the dining-room, we met the King and the Queen in the hall. The Queen came first and alone, shook hands with everybody and disappeared. She came back five minutes afterwards, and then started the conversation by saying to nobody in particular Mr. Colban, I understand you know my daughter. Happily I was paying attention and heard what she said, thus avoiding what might otherwise have been a rather painful position. She talked for a few minutes about Greece and Greek refugees, Nansens work and similar subjects. Then the American journalist interrupted, which he did repeatedly both during and after lunch, being, although a very nice old man, rather a little bit of a nuisance. Obviously the milieu was beyond him. The King came in, and having shaken hands with everybody, led the way into the dining-room. During lunch, the Queen immediately started talking with the King and me on family matters, taking as a point de dpart my acquaintance with her daughter Elizabeth, and

speaking most frankly about what people had said when two of her daughters had become Queens, accusing her of being ambitious and trying to make herself a kind of head of a widespread international dynasty. She went as far as to bring up the question of her youngest daughter Ileana, 14 years old, who had been said to be designated as the future Queen of Bulgaria. Bulgaria had been for so long the enemy of Romania. On the other hand, she had heard much good of King Boris. As far as her daughter was concerned, the fact that people spoke about her possible marriage with King Boris had of course just the effect of making her unwilling to consider such a proposal. I suggested that she might conveniently accept the position of future Queen of Norway. The Queen spoke of these things not in a joking way, but quite seriously, and gave short characteristics of her different daughters as well as of the husbands of two of them, the Kings of Greece and Serbia. She said that she hoped that she had been able to educate her daughters with a strict sense of duty and that some good might come out of their work in their new countries. She seemed to be very proud of her daughter Elizabeth, who had the difficult position of Queen of Greece. As to the other daughter, the Queen of Serbia, she was a little bit awed by her husband, King Alexander, who, in the eyes of his mother-in-law, is a very able man of strong character. She had told her daughter that she still had to reckon with the fact that she was married to a man who was still a bachelor. On the other hand, she thought that some alteration might soon come, as a child was expected. I think this conversation, which was made haute voix and followed with considerable attention and not a little pleasure by everybody at the table, lasted for 1/4 hour. Then the Queen went in to speak about her different activities during and after the war Red Cross work, literary work, in particular poems for children, fairy tales, etc.; also her interest in riding, gardening, houses, and the education of her children. She gave a number of vivid pictures of family life in the Royal Family. One of them which appealed to me was when she explained how/when her short stories written in English (she was born in Kent and speaks better English than Romanian) were translated in the family, her husband and children assisted in getting the right Romanian expressions for her English ones. During the whole time the Queen led the conversation in this way, the King now and then talked on different questions with Miss Harris, (when I heard a conversation on Minorities I intervened and the Queen then cut us down), but generally he was listening with a nice smile to what his wife said. I am not perhaps a very good judge of such situations, but I have the feeling that they are an extremely happy family, and I note it because of all the ridiculous rumours one hears to the contrary. The Queen, although she is some 45 years of age, is not only, as will appear from what I have said, a pleasant, winning, and, I believe I may say highly intelligent woman, but she is certainly a great asset to her country. What she may have done to keep up the spirit of resistance and the hope for better times I cannot judge, but she certainly has now a keen sense of what she can do in order to consolidate the kingdom by her personal activities among the people and she does it. She always wears some national Romanian costume, and she wears it with grace, and what is not always absolutely easy, without any appearance of acting to lessen the good impression. The King, with his 55 years, gave me the impression of a hard-working man, with a keen sense of duty, fully au courant with the business of Government and ready to place himself at the disposal of his Ministers for doing such representative work as may be useful to the country. After lunch, the King and I had rather a prolonged talk on the purpose of my visit to Romania. He was exceedingly well informed and even gave statistical data on several

questions relating to Minorities protection for instance he gave me figures relating to the proportion of expropriated landed property distributed to peasants of Romanian race as compared with such property distributed to peasants of Hungarian race. He used almost verbally the expression M. Duca and several other members of the Cabinet had used to me, namely, that he wanted me to get the truth. Romania had nothing to hide and he was sure that when I had studied conditions thoroughly I should feel that her policy had been one of justice and liberality. The young Princess Ileana came down and shook hands with everybody. She is a nice young thing, perhaps not exactly beautiful, but fresh and apparently strong. The Queen told me (as we had already heard from M. Duca) that the Crown Prince would receive us the same day at Brashov (Kronstadt), where he was presiding over a national sports competition, where sportsmen from all parts of Greater Romania and belonging to different nationalities were participating. She hoped that the friendly competition of the different nationalities would interest me. I said that it certainly would. In this connection I may add that during my conversation with the King I had laid stress on the assistance to the solution of Minorities problem with the Royal Family might give; being outside parties, and representing in a neutral way all the elements of the State, they were particularly called upon to make the bridge between these different elements. He fully agreed, and I am informed that the Royal Family have been very keen to learn all parts of the Greater Romania, to know and get in touch with the people everywhere. I had myself an opportunity the same afternoon of seeing this as far as the Crown Prince is concerned, and I heard the Queen discussing with M. Constantinescu arrangements for supplying her with exact models of national costumes to wear when visiting the Sicules. When the Royal Family had withdrawn, I had a talk with M. Constantinescu. He was obviously very well informed on our mission to Romania, and he once more expressed the desire that I should see everything, hear everything and leave with the fullest understanding of conditions. He was very courteous and quite friendly. He is said to have been the instigator of the agrarian reform. He said that this reform was in every respect carried out in the same way towards Romanians and Hungarians, and that statistics showed that the Romanian peasants did not get proportionately more expropriated land than did the Hungarians. No discrimination to the disadvantage of the Hungarians was made. He supervised this question himself very closely. Instructions had been given that I should be supplied with all kinds of statistics and detailed information. After lunch, we motored northwards to Brashov (Kronstadt), where we attended the sports competition. We were received at the entrance by the prefect of the district, who in some few words in German wished us welcome as representatives of the League of Nations. He took us to the Crown Prince, who was very friendly and said that he has wanted us to come as he thought I might be interested in seeing the friendly competition between Romanian citizens of all races and from all parts of the country. He went through with me the list of associations, and also a number of the names of the competitors. He spoke equally well, as I heard myself, and without apparently any effort, German, French and English. I heard him address the sportsmen, of whom some seemed to be soldiers, in many cases in German. I also heard him talk in French to other Romanians perhaps quite as often as he spoke to them in his own language. The Crown Prince, who is himself the Chairman of the Sports Association of Romania (with a Jew as Vice-Chairman), is said to have a great facility for mixing with everybody, and

I believe that reports which state that he is exceedingly popular everywhere in the country, to which he pays constant visits, are true. After the sports, we went to dine with the Prefect and two other gentlemen from Brashov. M. Jonescu, and M. Pteancu, the two Church and School experts previously mentioned, were also present. The prefect told me that Brashov has about 60,000 inhabitants, of whom about one-third are Romanians, one-third Saxons (Germans), and one-third Hungarians. He had taken over his prefecture about 8 months ago, and his predecessor had perhaps not had a happy hand in bringing the different parts of the population to live well together. He himself thought that he had succeeded to a considerable extent in so doing. School and Church questions resulting from Minorities questions did not now give rise to any real trouble. There were 3 daily newspapers in the town, 1 Romanian, 1 German and 1 Hungarian. The latter, of which I bought a copy, was quite a big paper and the prefect told me that it is sold in 18,000 copies a day. He said that it was rather hostile, and as an example he mentioned the fact that it always enjoys the opportunity of being able to report difficulties for France. The prefect told me that he had now been transferred about a fortnight ago to Oradea Mare, and was to take up his duties there during the next few days, so that it might even be possible that we could meet him there. The town had this same day given a banquet for the Crown Prince, and the Prince had made a very nice speech, congratulating the prefect on the result of his work in Brashov and expressing the hope that his successor would follow the same lines of administration as had been his. The Prince had expressed himself on the question of Minorities, and done it in such a way as to arouse general satisfaction. The prefect promised to send me a copy of a newspaper giving an account of the banquet. About his new prefecture he told me that he would there have the administration of 400,000 individuals, of whom about 300,000 were Magyars. The task ahead of him was difficult, but he felt sure that some good work could be done. It was, he said, very important to look in the first instance to the administration and not to the legislation. Even the best laws could be badly administered, and laws of rather doubtful value might be administered in such a way as to give satisfaction to the interests of the population. His own opinion of the Minorities problem he summed up as follows: the Minorities ought to be left free to preserve their cultural particularities, and especially their churches and schools, but they ought to be so far nationalized as to have to be loyal to their new State and consider themselves as an integral part of that State. Magyars and Saxons, although preserving their special national cult, ought to feel that they were all equally Romanian subjects. Among the events of this day, I might also mention that H. Hoden said to me that he had heard from M. Jouvenel, who had seen M. Bratiano recently, that M. Bratiano still maintained his intransigent attitude towards the League of Nations and its work on Minorities problems. He had, however, given M. Duca a free hand to act for the present. E. C. 28 / 7 / 23 * **

We left Brashov during the night of July 28th, and, in accordance with our program, proceeded towards Gheorghieni, where we were to visit certain villages in the neighborhood, and arrive in the evening at Miercurea Ciucului. In the train I had a first conversation with M. Jonescu, Director General for Minorities Churches in the Ministry of Public Worship at Bucharest, which lasted for 1 1/4 hours. M. Jonescu had been attached for 14 years to the Ministry for Schools Questions in Budapest and was educated in Germany at the University of Jena. He went through the budget with me, explaining in detail how the priests and other officials of the Minorities Churches were paid, showing considerable advantages, for the clergy of Transylvania compared with those of old Romania. He gave me a copy of the Romanian original of a paper he had handed in to the Foreign Ministry, and of which I had got a French summary. I took up some of the more important points of this paper, so as to make quite sure that there was no misunderstanding that it really meant to say what was the surface value of the words. I then said that I had, as he knew, a number of petitions concerning ecclesiastical matters, and that although I did not think it was possible to enter into all of them I would like to raise one or two points. I mentioned the contention that the Agrarian Reform in Transylvania hits the Churches very hard by taking away from them their previous possessions of land. M. Jonescu said that the question of the Agrarian Reform was outside his competence, but he could assure me that by the execution of the reform it was not the Churches which suffered but eventually only certain Church dignitaries personally. All the legitimate needs of the Churches were met by the State, and when the Government expropriated the Churches land, it obviously had to take full responsibility for the finances of the Churches. I then mentioned the decree of the Romanian Ministry of Public Worship of November 16 1921, concerning the rearrangement of the protopopies of the Minorities Churches. M. Jonescu explained that while in Romania the protopopies covered in most cases a great number of parishes (he showed me a list of protopopies with between 40 and 55 parishes each), the position in Transylvania had been that many protopopies covered a very small number of parishes, even in one case only 2. The Orthodox Church had about 13,000,000 souls with 16,218 priests and 179 protopopes, while the Minorities Churches 3,200,000 souls with 3,572 priests and 153 protopopes, all paid by the Government with 600 lei a month in addition to their salaries as priests. It had therefore been found necessary for budgetary reasons to establish a rule that the Government would not pay the holder of the office of a protopope unless the protopopy covered not less then 20 parishes, but of course this did not in any way mean that a parish was by force transferred to some other protopopy or that the Government in any way interfered with the way in which the protopopies were constituted. If the parishes themselves found it desirable to pay for such offices in excess of the number allowed by the rule, they were free to do so. I also mentioned the question of another decree of the Ministry of Public Worship of November 16, 1921, establishing the rule that parishes of less than 300 souls would be maintained by the Romanian Government only after approval by the Ministry. M. Jonescu explained that the rule had been grossly misunderstood. It did not imply of necessity the suppression of any priest and the transfer of the parish to another priest. If the parishioners were willing to pay for a priest who had under him only a very small number of parishioners, (he showed me statistics, of which he promised to send me a copy, according to which the

number of parishioners was in many cases below 100) that was their business, but the State responsible for the payment of the salaries of all the priests could not allow the Churches to maintain priests at the expense of the State when the presence of a priest was not based upon any real need. The rule referred to was not a hard and fast law, but only imposed upon the Churches the duty of reporting to the Ministry all vacancies for priests where the number of souls in the parish was less than 300, so as to enable the Government to judge upon the merits of each case and decide whether it would be necessary to fill the vacancy or not. Nothing prevented the Government, event with this rule, from deciding to replace the priest if, for instance, the number of souls in the parish was only say 200, or 150, should local conditions make the appointment desirable. I also asked whether it was true that local minor officials administered the laws and decrees relating to the Minorities Churches in a way contrary to the interests of the Minorities, and generally took up a hostile attitude towards the Minorities Churches in these matters. M. Jonescu said that during the period immediately after the war the hostility prevailing between the Hungarians and the Romanians in Transylvania did to some extent influence also the attitude of the local Romanian officials. But the position was altogether different now and the administration did their very best to see that the rules in force were executed with due regard to the interests of the Minorities Churches. I then mentioned to M. Jonescu that the General Presbyterian Alliance in Edinburgh had written to me on the subject of the position of the Minorities Churches, and I asked whether I could affirm that full individual liberty was secured to the office bearers and members of the Reformed Church in Transylvania, and that reasonable facilities were given to them for Church and University journeys abroad without jeopardy to their citizenship. M. Jonescu most emphatically stated this to be the case. What the Government had done was to refuse to recognize any administrative subordination of the Minorities Churches towards Churches outside the territory. The Reformed Church counted some 700,000 souls on Romanian soil, and no necessity existed for any administrative connection with foreign countries, but in so far as the Churches wanted to correspond or maintain relations with similar Churches in foreign countries on matters of dogma, or any other strictly religious questions, they were free to do so. I also asked whether the Reformed Church organizations within the country were allowed to function without hindrance, and in particular whether the Reformed Synod of Transylvania was officially free to communicate with other Reformed Churches in Hungary and elsewhere on ecclesiastical matters. M. Jonescu said that this was absolutely the case. With a couple of hours delay we arrived at Gheorghieni, where we were met at the station by the Prefect, M. Sptaru, and the following deputies M. Erdeyi (Hungarian, formerly prefect of the district), M. Cristea (Romanian), and Dr. Etienne Bogdan (Romanian) (Ancien Snateur, Rue Frumoas 48, Bucharest). We motored to Suseni, where we were received by a great crowd of several hundred people, and with music. The sub-prefect of the district made a speech, partly in Hungarian, partly in Romanian, to which the prefect replied in Romanian, and M. Erdeyi translated it into Hungarian. I did not of course understand the speeches, but had the feeling that the prefect was hailed with great satisfaction. Then an old Hungarian peasant made a speech and we went into luncheon, where about 30 people were present. The members of the Secretariat were placed as guests and I sat to the right of M. Szes Gza, Director of the Lycee at Gheorghieni. He is a Hungarian. To the right of me sat another Hungarian, who told me that while more

than 90% of the municipality were Hungarian, about 80% of those present were of this nationality. Several speeches were made. Each time the prefects name was mentioned everybody applauded. The protopope (Hungarian) made a long speech hailing the delegation of the Secretariat of the League of Nations, to which I had to reply some few words, thanking him for the friendly reception. The conversation with everybody went on in German. French was almost never used, although some few of those present understood that language. The general theme of the different speeches was that the Sicules were proud of their country, their schools and language and their local autonomy, upon the maintenance of which they insisted, but were also loyal to the King and to the Greater Romania. After lunch we motored to Lazarea, where we were received by the Mayor, and the head of the Roman Catholic school. The Mayor made a speech. The Prefect replied and was translated into Hungarian. We went to the school building, which was exceedingly clean and made a very good impression on me. The time-table of one of the classes was translated for me, from which it appeared that the instruction was given in Hungarian, and that there was no trace of Romanisation as far as the language was concerned, and as far as it is possible to judge from the time-table of a school class. The next stop on our way was Ditrau. This is a somewhat larger village, with a big Roman Catholic Cathedral, which we visited. We were received by the Mayor who made a speech, to which the Prefect replied. The speech of the Mayor was given to me. I understand that it deals with certain questions concerning Agrarian Reform, and, in particular, forests. We went to see the Primary School and the Secondary School, but did not enter these buildings, having met one of the teachers. He was questioned by the prefect on school conditions, and it seems that he made the statement that just recently the Romanian Government had issued an order to the effect that the Romanian language was now to take the place of Hungarian in the schools. M. Pteancu, who was present, objected and said that he would like to see the order, as certainly no such order had been issued. Then the Director of the School, a Roman Catholic priest, came and I think explained that there had been a misunderstanding. The time-table for the Secondary School was produced, and a couple of the columns translated for me into German, showing that Romanian was taught some few hours a week in certain classes, and that the rest of the instruction was in Hungarian. The order in question was also produced, and explained by M. Pteancu to contain a rule that so and so many hours of instruction in Romanian should be given in the different classes, and so and so many hours in Hungarian, but of course the language in which all the instruction was given (except instruction in the Romanian language) was Hungarian. This incident seemed to impress the Romanians who were with us very much. They spoke to me quite openly about the teacher who had made the erroneous statement as having told a lie, and as having been trying to make propaganda. I said that I could not possibly believe this, as his statement would then have shown too great stupidity. In my opinion what had occurred was simply a misunderstanding, although perhaps not quite defensible on the part of a teacher asked to give us reliable information. We dined at Ditrau. The prefect was with us and also the priest, whom I placed next to me so as to be able to talk with him. I examined him on school and church questions in his district in general. I asked him about his salary, and whether he misunderstood or whether he intended to mislead me, I understood him to say that he received 12, 000 lei a year. I said that that was very little, and then M. Jonescu, who was sitting at the other end of the table, intervened and asked the priest if there was not perhaps some mistake, and whether he had not

spoken only of the part of his salary arising from local contributions. A short discussion ensued between M. Jonescu and the priest, which I failed to catch in detail, but I believe that the priest acknowledged that his total income was very much higher than these 12,000 lei. M. Jonescu later on explained to me that this priest had not informed the Government, as he ought to have done, that his local income was raised from 1,000 lei, as fixed in 1898, to 12,000 lei. M. Jonescu intimated that the priest was... I, however, do not believe this and am of the opinion that only linguistic difficulties between the priests and myself led to some misstatement. I may note that later on M. Jonescu gave me the following information: local contributions towards the salaries of the priests were fixed in 1898, and had to be deducted from the total salary when the State made out its account of how much it had to pay. Since 1898 the local contribution had generally increased very much, and strictly the priests were bound to inform the Government of this so as to enable the Government to deduct the local contribution from the total to be paid by the State. Nothing however prevented the commune from making the increase in its increased contribution conditional, and from saying that the State should not deduct the corresponding amount. In this way the priests got a considerably higher salary than the total salary, including allowances for increased cost of living, etc., stipulated in the Budget of the State. My general impression from the visits made during this day was that the prefect was generally very well liked and always met with great courtesy, and that his speeches were well applauded. As to the type of persons present at the different gatherings, I failed to find representatives of what I might call the intellectual classes, with the exception of the officials present. Perhaps my judgment is erroneous, as even the Mayors of the different towns would not have struck me as belonging to any other than the peasant class. The gatherings were very large. At Ditrau I believe there were more than 1, 000 people. The speeches were listened to with the utmost attention and frequently interrupted by applause. No discord could be noticed, which of course does not exclude the possibility of the really dissatisfied members of the villages having stayed away. I do not believe that anybody present at these meetings had any approximately clear conception of what the League of Nations is. Our different nationalities were always mentioned, and we were considered, I think, more as a Commission of Enquiry with full powers than as only a delegation of certain officials of the Secretariat. I tried in talks with several of the deputies present to give them a cleared conception. I asked many people in all the different places about the economic position, and got the unanimous reply that although prices were very high and life thereby rendered more difficult, the immediate prospects were very good, particularly in view of the good harvest expected this year. As to prices, I should mention that my impression was confirmed from authoritative sources that the cost of living generally is by no means as high as in Western European countries, if only the internal value of the leu is considered: in other words the leu has a much higher internal buying capacity than is indicated by its quotation at the bourse. E. C. 29 / 7 / 23 * **

We slept in the train also that night and went to Gheorghieni, where we arrived on the morning of July 30th. The Prefect took us for another motor drive up in the mountains, to a place called Ghilcos. The whole drive was exceedingly pleasant. From a tourist point of view, I dare say I have never seen a more attractive mountain country. It was more open than the Swiss mountains generally are, but quite as wild and the cliffs were of imposing dimensions. One single very excellent road led from Gheorghieni to this place. During the drive I was in a car with the prefect, M. Jonescu and M. Azcarate. I took the opportunity of asking M. Jonescu about the legal conditions of forests in Transylvania, seeing that we were passing through such wonderfully wooded country. He consulted with the prefect, and gave some very interesting information. I believe that M. Azcarate took notes. We returned to Gheorghieni for lunch. We met the Minister for Bucovine affairs, whom I have mentioned previously when recording our visit to the petrol fields. He seemed quite happy to see the company again. The Mayor of Gheorghieni was present and gave Miss Harris wonderful flowers. M. Gza, Director of the lycee at Gheorghieni, was also there. After lunch we motored down to Miercurea Ciucului, the residence of the prefect, where another meal was offered us. At the prefects house I met one of the Inspectors from the Ministry of Public Instruction, with whom I had an interesting talk. He explained to me his conception of the Minorities problem and his opinions were generally very much the same as my own, although of course he underlined somewhat more strongly the necessity of the Minorities being fully and wholly loyal to the State. The prefect at this dinner, as on other occasions when we lunched or dined with him, sat with one or two of his own company and not quite near to us. I am sure the only reason was that he speaks rather poor French and very little German. He was on this occasion, as always, exceedingly courteous and friendly. M. Bogdan, the Deputy and former Senator, whom I mentioned earlier, was also present at the dinner, and went with us when we left for Tushnad, where I understand he has his home in the summer. After this dinner, which came to an end about 5 in the afternoon, we motored down in the direction of Tushnad. A short time after we left the prefects house, we came to a place where about 60 people had gathered and we made a short halt. The local Judge, who I understand was a Sicule of Hungarian tongue, made a speech, which was translated for me into German, welcoming the delegation of the Secretariat and assuring us of the loyalty of the population towards the country. I got a copy of the speech, as well as of the translation, from the two gentlemen who spoke. After a very nice drive (all these motor drives were really wonderfully nice), we arrived at Tushnad, a bathing resort of considerable beauty, situated in a forest of pines. I had a long talk with M. Bogdan as we walked up and down the streets and by-ways. I tried to explain to him briefly the aims of the League of Nations, its general policy, the position of the Secretariat etc. I also entered into the Minorities problem. He said that he personally was of the opinion that it was wiser for the Romanians not to go too fast in their efforts to make the other nationalities forget that they had previously been the subjects of another State. To his mind the most liberal policy towards the Minorities was the right one, and he had taken that line in discussion with the Government (M. Azcarate has told me that M. Bogdan informed him that he is a personal friend of M. Bratiano). He thought that the Government had been ill-advised in appointing too many Romanian officials in the new

provinces. On the other hand, he felt that the Government was inspired by good will towards the Minorities with regard to schools and churches. He asked whether I had seen M. Bratiano, and expressed his hope that as I had not done this it would be possible for me to meet him when I came back to Bucharest. He himself belonged, as I understand, to the Liberal party of M. Bratiano, and I have the impression that he followed our work in the district with quite as keen an interest as the prefect and perhaps with more personal understating. When I went as far as to suggest that it was a pity that there were only 3 or 4 Magyar Deputies in the Romanian Parliament and that the position would be quite different when there were 20, he said that he quite agreed, and he came back to this my suggestion shortly afterwards, repeating his acquiescence. M. Bogdan promised to send me, either to the Foreign Ministry at Bucharest, or to Geneva, a copy of the newspapers from the district, which gave an account of our journey there. I, on my side, promised to arrange form him to receive such League publications as might interest him. Similar promises I also made to several other persons mentioned in these notes. M. Hoden will draw up a list and a full program of maintaining liaison with Romania, and let me see it before it is finally adopted. We shall of course have to write to a number of persons immediately after our return to Geneva, to express our thanks for their courtesy during our stay here. After a light supper, during which I continued to talk to M. Bogdan, we finally left Tushnad shortly before midnight. I expressed my great gratitude to the prefect for the exceedingly courteous manner in which he had assisted us, and also expressed my congratulations on the good relations he had established between himself and the population during the 10 months of his prefecture. The following day, July 31st, we had expected to arrive in Sibiu at 9 in the morning, but as the result of some mishap with regard to the arrangement for our special cars to be attached to the right train, we only arrived at 2.30 in the afternoon. I took advantage of the morning thus at my disposal to talk with M. Jonescu, and M. Pteancu on different church and school questions. I first discussed with M. Jonescu alone certain church questions, only making quite clear different points of previous discussions. Then M. Pteancu came, and also M. Hoden and M. Azcarate, and we went through the general position of the Minorities schools. M. Hoden and M. Azcarate took notes very carefully during the discussion, and it was agreed that they should compare them and let me have as detailed a paper as possible on the discussion, on my return to Geneva. At the station at Sibiu we were received by the Prefect, M. Boiu, and the Mayor, M. Goritz. We were taken to a hotel where we had lunch. During the drive to the hotel and during lunch, I asked the Prefect and the Mayor certain introductory questions, and found out that the prefect was born in Sibiu and had attended the Evangelical gymnasium there. He consequently spoke very excellent German. He was 50 years of age, married to an English lady whose father was a German living in England. He had been prefect, if I remember rightly, for a little more than a year. The Mayor was a little older, and of pure Saxon blood. The conversations during our stay in Sibiu were almost exclusively in German. The Prefect and the Mayor told me that the number of inhabitants of Sibiu was about 32,000, which means that the number has been unaltered since before the war. This is accounted for by the fact that about 4,000 military people then in garrison had been withdrawn, about 2,000, Hungarians had left, and a corresponding or somewhat higher

number of Romanians had immigrated into the town. The present situation was that of the 32,000 the great majority was Saxon, 7 or 8,000 were Romanian, and 2,000 were of Hungarian race. Of Jews the town had only some few. The Hungarians who had left were for the most part officials and small merchants whose living there had been conditional on the presence of the Hungarian troops and Hungarian officials. After lunch we went out for a round of visits, and first called on M. Teutsch, Bishop of the Evangelical Church. The Prefect and the Mayor were with us. M. Jonescu and M. Pteancu were present, but M. Lecca and M. Diano and Miss Harris were not. M. Teutsch is an elderly gentleman of perhaps a little more than 60 years of age, and of a very German type. The Prefect started the conversation by saying that we had come to hear what he might have to tell us about the position of his church in so far as it might be of interest of the League of Nations. M. Teutsch said that he was ready to answer any questions. I said that I perhaps had not at this stage any particular questions to ask, but was very happy to make his acquaintance and would be pleased to hear what he might desire to tell us about the conditions of his church, so as to enable us to understand the problems of the church in Transylvania as well as possible. M. Teutsch said that during so short a visit as ours this was rather difficult, but that he was at our disposal for giving information at any time. He then went on to mention certain particular questions, above all the financial position of the church, which he said gave rise to considerable anxiety. He had, however, the firm hope that the Government would deal with the Evangelical Church in such a way as to satisfy its legitimate claims. He mentioned that a new church and a new school law were under preparation, and in reply to my query, he stated that the draft of the church law had been sent to him for an opinion, which he had given, and he hoped that the Government would consider that opinion in the most favorable light. This law would also settle the financial question. As to his relations with M. Jonescu, they had always been excellent. M. Jonescu said that the draft church law would be reconsidered in the light of the replies from the different churches and again submitted to them for observations before being finally submitted to Parliament. The Bishop then went on to mention the request of the Government that the boys of the schools, including the gymnasia, should wear not only a cap, as was already agreed to by the church, but that they should also wear a uniform. The Bishop said that his church would resist this request with all their power. The boys in the gymnasia took great exception to a uniform, which would even bear a number. The prefect and M. Pteancu explained that the wearing of uniform was decreed for all the schools of the country and not only for the Minorities schools, and it was thought to be in the long run economical for the parents and advantageous for the boys. The Bishop, however, insisted on his point of view. The Bishop then mentioned the recent decree issued by the University of Cluj, under which students should now be admitted to the different faculties of the University only if they had passed a special test. This meant that the diplomas the students received from the gymnasia were no longer considered sufficient for admission to the University, and it seemed unreasonable to the Bishop that the University should have the power of lessening in this way the value of the diplomas, particularly as the Committee before which the special test was to be made would be composed of Romanians. M. Pteancu and M. Jonescu explained that the decree was issued by the University in virtue of its rights of autonomy, and not by the Government, and that it seemed to be based upon the consideration that too many young people asked for admission to the University. It was therefore necessary to check this in some

way and the best and most impartial way seemed to be by the institution of a special test, proving in each case that the student was apt for the study he particularly wanted to pursue. The Bishop then spoke about the consequences of the Agrarian Reform, which had deprived the churches and schools of so much of their property, and put them in very great difficulties. The answer to this from the Romanians present was the usual one, that the Agrarian Reform hit quite as hard in old Romania as in Transylvania, and that the State would have to consider the position of the church, and pay where the church was not able to do so. In each case, M. Jonescu said, the contribution to the church was to be fixed in consideration of the number of adherents to that church, and in consideration of the financial position of the church. I asked whether it was meant that no exhortation to make endowments should be given, and M. Jonescu made it quite clear that the financial position of each church would be considered when the States contribution was fixed. Rather to my astonishment, the Bishop said that that was a fair solution. From M. Teutsch we went to the Metropolite of the Orthodox Church M. Blan, who received us with somewhat more cordiality than had the Bishop. He assured us that he was glad to see the delegation from the League in his house and he asked us to come to lunch with him the next day. The next visit was to M. Schullerus, Senator and Evangelical priest of the town of Sibiu. There rather an interesting conversation took place, as he expressed his dissatisfaction with the fact that the Minorities guarantee had not been incorporated in the new Constitution, and that therefore the Minorities were at the mercy of any future Government. When I said that of course the Government could not alter the Constitution without the consent of the Parliament, he smilingly replied that the Government would certainly control the Parliament. I did not consider it wise to mention that of course the Minorities Treaty which Romania has promulgated as law cannot be modified without the consent of the League of Nations and that thereby a sufficient constitutional guarantee is given. M. Schullerus let us understand that the members of the present Government had given verbal assurances of generally a satisfactory character with regard to the future position of the church. He had also seen the draft church law and made his observations. Finally we visited M. Walbaum, who, I believe, belonged to the Liberal political party. The visit was only one of courtesy, and without any real interest. All the visits were on this occasion, as on all previous occasions, arranged by the Romanian authorities. I did not express any desire to see other persons. The same night a dinner took place at the hotel, offered by the prefect, and attended by the persons we had called on in the afternoon and some few others, including several ladies. No speeches were made. I sat beside Madame Boiu, who spoke in high terms of the Royal Family, their constant visits to the different parts of the country, and their interest in social work. On my other side was the Metropolite, who started the conversation by explaining the organization of his church, and how he was elected and not appointed; the King only had the right to confirm his appointment but not to propose his candidature to the Synod. I then spoke about the ideals of the League and he suggested that collaboration with the church would be a very good thing as the ideals were mainly the same. I said that that was my opinion and that I had mentioned the same thing to M. Bourgeois a long time ago, and that he had agreed. I sincerely hoped that the high officials of the church would take an interest in the work of the League. We slept that night at Sibiu.

E. C. 1 / 8 / 23 * ** The next day, August 1st, I met the Mayor, and asked him what was the method of election of the Mayors in the villages and towns. He said that in the villages they were still elected, but in the towns the previous Municipal Councils had been dissolved and the Mayor was appointed by the Government. We then went out for a couple of hours sightseeing and had a motor drive to two Saxon and one Romanian villages. Everywhere there were signs of good economic conditions. As arranged the previous day, we went to lunch with the Metropolite, where practically the same persons were present as had been at the dinner the previous night. I sat between M. Schullerus and the Metropolite, with the Bishop opposite the Metropolite. Conversation was partly general, but I had a good opportunity of talking at some length with M. Schullerus, who proved to be a very good German scholar, and taking a keen interest in old Norwegian language, which he seemed to know better than I myself. The Metropolite entered into a long dissertation on the Agrarian Reform, on which he had certainly prepared to give us his views. He had given it his benediction because it was humanly just and he said that if his church had been in the happy position of having large landed property, he would still have recommended it. The Bishop and M Schullerus pointed out the financial difficulties in which the reform had put the Minorities schools, and one or two of the Romanians present replied that Romanian charitable institutions had also suffered very much. The Metropolite made a speech for the League and its ideals and in the most friendly terms whished us good luck and hoped that we should understand the Romanian problem. I answered very briefly, underlining the importance of the particular civilization of the Romanian people, and the hope that the different qualities of the different races living together in Greater Romania would collaborate towards the development and the welfare of the whole Romanian State. After lunch we motored to Ocna Sibiului, a bathing place with rather nice arrangements and in a beautiful country with very salt water. M. Jonescu said he would like to explain the position with regard to the rumor, which had frightened M. Schullerus that the confessional schools would be abolished and replaced by State schools. The situation was that when the former Hungarian schools had been taken over by the Romanian State the teachers of the Romanian Orthodox schools had complained that their salaries were lower than those paid to the teachers of these Hungarian schools. They had therefore asked the Government to appoint them as State officials, and this had been granted to them individually, but without touching in any way the character of the confessional schools as not being State schools. It was simply an economic arrangement in favour of the individual teachers. I do not quite understand how far this has not put the teachers of the Orthodox schools in a privileged position as compared with the teachers of the Minorities schools. We left the same night for Cluj. E. C. 2 / 8 / 23

* ** We arrived on August 2nd at Cluj, and were received at the station by a person from the prefecture (the new Prefect had not yet arrived), by the Mayor, by Dr. Geza Kiss, Deputy of Hungarian race (son-in-law of the Minister of Finance in Hungary); Dr. Eugen Bianu, Inspector General for Siebenbrgen, was also present, as was M. Emil Isac, Inspector of Fine Arts. I did not quite grasp what was his position, but he spoke the whole time he was with us about theatres, and showed us one Hungarian and one Romanian theatre in Cluj. After a short talk at the station where we had the first small breakfast, we went out to visit a number of religious and school institutions. Before so doing, I had, however, mentioned to our hosts that it might be desirable, if they had not already thought of that, to give M. Ugron, former Hungarian Minister in Bucharest, now living in Cluj (the man who came to see me in Bucharest) an opportunity of being present. It was said at once that this should be arranged, and shortly afterwards that it had been found out that he was already on the list of guests invited to meet us, at which I expressed my satisfaction. Under the guidance of one of the professors we went to the University, and passed through its different dependencies, medical clinics, library etc. As far as I understood, there were two Directors of the Library, one of whom, Dr. Gyalui, a Hungarian, had been there for more than 30 years. He said that the Library was still kept with great care by the Romanian Government and we went through the staff list, which showed a large number of Hungarians in superior as well as in minor positions in the Library. A reading room for children had been opened, with Hungarian and Romanian books and was well used. We then called in different confessional schools and one Romanian and one Hungarian theatre, as I have already mentioned. When we were in one of the University buildings, I received a card from M. Charles Nagy, Evque reform de Transylvanie, asking when and where he could have a few minutes talk with me before the luncheon which was to take place the same morning. I answered his Secretary, who brought the note, that our programme was very strained in the morning, but that I would be very pleased to be at the disposal of the Bishop immediately after lunch. When we arrived at the Unitarian school building, we happened to meet the Unitarian Bishop at the front door, and went in with him to his office. I then found that the ecclesiastical representatives in the town had decided the previous day not to accept invitations to the luncheon to be given. The following note, dated August 2nd, was handed to me:
A Monsieur Colban, Secrtaire gnral de la Ligue des Nations: Monsieur, Les soussigns ont recu la ci-jointe invitation pour assister un djeuner donn en lhonneur de la dlgation de la Ligue des Nations. Nous disons ainsi pour les personnes qui arrangent ce djeuner, que pour les personnes en lhonneur desquelles il est arrang, la responsabilit que nous avons vis--vis des intrts de nos Eglises nous empche, notre grand regret, dy prendre part.

Nous ne voudrions donner occasion ce que les conversations ventuelles dans le cadre dun djeuner pussent tre consideres qualifies comme une discussion fond de la situation et des dolances des Eglises appartenant la minorit. Mais, comme il est dailleurs de notre devoir, nous vous prions de vouloir bien disposer et de notre personne et des documents que nous pouvons prsenter pour ltude serieuse et detaille de notre situation, si la dlgation trouve le temps ncssaire pour sen occuper. Mais nous devons avouer, que ltude de quelques heures nous parat trs insuffisant pour ce propos. Nous regretterions vivement si loccasion ntait pas donne aux Eglises minoritaires de prsenter leurs dolances fondes lhonorable dlgation de la Ligue des Nations et si ainsi larrive de la dlgation, attendue par nous avec de si grandes esprances, devrait rester sans bienfaisants resultats pour les minorits. Nous avons lhonneur, Monsieur, de vous prier de vouloir bien agrer lexpression de notre haute considration. (signe) Ferencz Evque de lEglise Unitaire Dr. Gusztav Kirchknopf Cur de lEglise luthrienne de lEglise catholique de Cluj. Cluj, le 2 aot 1923. * * * Primria oraului Cluj No. 3229 1923. pres. INVITAIUNE Joi 2 August urmeaz a sosi n Cluj cu trenul accelerat Dnii delegai ai Ligei Naiunilor, cari vor rmne n oraul nostru pn la 7. 30 seara cnd vor continua drumul spre Oradea Mare cu trenul accelerat. La ora 1 se va servi un dejun la Parcul comunal. Aducndu-V aceasta la cunotin, avem onoare a V ruga s binevoii a lua parte i Dvoastr la dejunul oferit de Ministrul de Externe n onoarea acestor reprezentani. Cluj, 1 August 1923 Prefectul n concediu Primar: Octavian Utalea (signed) A. Mou Episcopia Unitar Loco Charles Nagy Evque de lEglise reforme de Transylvanie Dr. Jos. Hirschler (?) Le chanoine abb mitr Cur de Cluj

After consulting with M. Hoden and M. Azcarate, and in agreement with M. Jonescu and M. Diano who were present, I decided to answer the representative of the Reformed Bishop who brought this letter, that there was a misunderstanding, as certainly we should be very pleased to have a full discussion with him and his colleagues in the afternoon, but of course we then expected that they would come to the luncheon. If they did so, we should come to the office of any one of the Bishops at 4 in the afternoon. The Unitarian Bishop seemed to accept

this arrangement, and, if I understood rightly, undertook to get into touch with the others who had signed the letter of August 2nd. At the luncheon were present the following persons, in addition to the members of the Secretariat: M. Popovici (prefect de police) The Secretary of the Episcopal Orthodox Church M. Emil Isac (Inspector of Fine Arts) M. G. Lecca Inspector Bianu Dr. Geza Kiss (Deputy) M. Fauernig (Austrian Consul) M. Frasch (Czechoslovak Consul) M. Diano Inspector Pteancu Dr. S. Dianu (Professor at the University) Dr. Fischer M. Adler (President of the Orthodox Jewish Committee) Councillor Moge M. Glasner (Chief Rabbi) Dr. Elie Dianu (Greek Catholic Bishop) M. Jacobovici (Rector of the University) General and Madame Florescu Canon Balars (Roman Catholic) M. Nagy (Bishop of the Reformed Church) M. Ferencz (Bishop of the Unitarian Church). It will be seen that the Bishops and also the Canon of the Catholic Church came to the luncheon. The Lutheran priest did not appear, but he told us, when we called at his office in the afternoon, that he had never been informed that an arrangement had been arrived at, and that he very much regretted not to have been present. During the luncheon, I discussed superficially with the Unitarian and Reformed Bishops (both Hungarians) certain school questions, but it was decided that no real discussion should take place until we met at 4 in the afternoon in the office of the Reformed Bishop. After the luncheon, the Grand Rabbi, M. Glasner, and the President of the Orthodox Jewish Committee, M. Adler, took me aside and told me briefly, but most emphatically, that they had no complaints, that they were loyal citizens to the new Government and only desired the Government and the Romanian people to understand and believe this fact. At 4, the members of the Secretariat, M. Jonescu, M. Pteancu and M. Diano arrived at the office of the Reformed Bishop, where we found the Unitarian Bishop and the Canon of the Catholic Church. M. Ugron was also present as interpreter thought were Secretaries of the different Bishops, were also present. I believe that M. Hoden and perhaps also M. Azcarate took notes of the discussion. I shall therefore only give a very brief summary, so much the more so as my memory is not able to retain all the details. The Reformed Bishop started by mentioning that up to the last minute they had no other information as to our plans than that we should leave early in the afternoon, and that was the

reason why they had thought it undesirable to come to the luncheon, thereby exposing themselves to the misunderstanding that a short talk over the luncheon table could be considered as a full and frank discussion of these most important matters. I answered by explaining briefly the character of our mission. I added that I should be very pleased to hear what anyone present might have to bring up. The Reformed Bishop then said that there was no reason to believe that their desire to maintain their schools and churches and the Hungarian language was the result of irredentism. The Minorities thought that they had reason to believe that a hostile attitude existed on the part of the Romanian Government. He then mentioned, in reply to my question as to whether he had any specific points to bring up, the Romanian decree limiting the States obligation to pay the salaries of the protopopes in cases where the protopopy was composed of a certain number of parishes. He also mentioned the decree under which vacancies among the priests should not be filled without reference to the Government in cases where the parish did not count 300 individuals. M. Jonescu replied to these two complaints on the lines on which he had previously explained these matters to me. (See my notes dated July 29th). The Bishop then went on to deal with certain stipulations in the new Romanian Constitution (Articles 22 and 72), which he said showed that the Minorities Churches were not dealt with in the same way as the Orthodox Church of the majority. He thought this to be contrary to the stipulations of the Minorities Treaty. I said that the Treaty provided that difference of religion should in no way be a reason for different treatment. M. Ugron then intervened and said That means that the different Churches shall be dealt with in exactly the same way. I did not think it desirable to state that I disagreed with him, but I believe that those present rather felt that there was a difference of opinion of this point. The Bishop also gave a rather detailed account on the fundamental conception of the relations between the Church and the State, in accordance with Hungarian laws, and pointed out that the autonomy of the Church was, to his mind, interfered with by the Government. Further discussion ensued on the financial position of the confessional schools and other questions. I believe I am right in stating that nothing new of interest came up. As a matter of fact, I was rather astonished that so little was told us that I did not know before. Two papers were handed in to me during the discussion, one by the Unitarian Bishop, and the other by the Catholic Canon, both containing specific complaints. I shall let M. Jonescu see them and send him copy from Geneva. One of the complaints contained in the paper from the Catholic Canon (under No. 4) was discussed at some length. It bears on the question as to whether the religious orders shall have the right to teach in their schools in any other language than Romanian. The point of view held by M. Pteancu and explained in the meeting was that the religious orders are not national institutions but foreign ones, and cannot be allowed to work unless they do so in the public interest. The Ministry of Public Instruction was therefore of opinion that it was now time that in the secondary schools of these orders the Romanian language ought to be introduced. (In Oradea Mare we visited one of these schools and found the staff considerably upset by the decree, which, it was said, would very probably lead to a great number of children not being given secondary instruction at all, but sent to work or occupied elsewhere). The Reformed Bishop during the discussion mentioned the statement said to have been made by Ministers of the present Government that it was treason to invoke the Minorities Treaty, and asked me what I thought about that. I said that I could not of course express an

opinion as to what might or might not have been said by various Ministers and that... definite knowledge of such facts. I thought, however, that it was quite natural that Ministers of the Government might have pointed out that they could not allow the Minorities to constitute, so to speak, a party to a process against their own Government. The Treaty did not recognize to the Minorities any such position. The Treaty arranged for collaboration between the Government and the League of Nations with a view to finding solutions of the many delicate questions arising from the fact that considerable racial, religious and linguistic Minorities subsisted in Europe after the war, but it would, for instance, be an impossible thing to allow the Minorities to sue their own Government before the International Court or before the Council of the League of Nations. It was for the States Members of the Council to decide what steps should be taken in each case, and the Minorities themselves could not initiate action. On the other hand, the Minorities were free to forward their views in petitions to the League of Nations. I thought, however, that it was perhaps not the very best thing to do to send in accusations against a Government, very often written from a one-sided opinion and based more upon fears for what might come than upon actual facts. I suggested that a better solution might be that when the Minorities wanted the Secretariat of the League to be fully informed they should write to us, without making it a formal petition. In such cases I should of course reserve to myself the right to send copy to the Romanian Government. M. Jonescu, without positively expressing an opinion seemed to agree fully with what I said. The Reformed Bishop, however, said that to them the question was whether the Romanian Government would not consider them as having committed some disloyal action if they wrote to the Secretariat. To this I considered it wise not to give a reply. The discussion lasted for 2 1/4 hours, and a motor excursion which was to have taken place had to be given up. After this meeting, we left cards with the representatives of other religious bodies in the town and also called on the Lutheran priest (Dr. Gusztav Kirchknopf), who, as I believe I said before, expressed his great regret at not having been informed of the modification of the program under which he ought to have been present at the luncheon. M. Jonescu later on told me, however, that this priest was a somewhat suspect person leading a vehement Magyar propaganda. We dined at the station with the same persons as had received us on our arrival in the morning. During dinner I was told that a journalist had been present at the meeting in the house of the Reformed Bishop, and had taken notes. I was very astonished and said to M. Diano that I would like the Bishop to be informed that I hoped it was understood that the discussion in his house had been of a private character and would not be given out to the Press. M. Diano asked M. Kiss to arrange with the Bishop that the papers should not report what had been said at the meeting. I also said myself to M. Kiss that I of course considered the Bishop responsible in a case like this as we had the meeting at his house and had not been told that the journalist was present. We left for Oradea Mare, sleeping in the train. E. C. 3 / 8 / 23 * **

We arrived at Oradea Mare on the morning of August 3rd, and were received at the station by the Prefect, M. Julien Peter, the Mayor and the Prefect of Police. The Prefect is of Swiss nationality, but has lived in Romania for, I think, 14 years, is married to a Romanian lady, and certainly, to judge from his attitude during discussions which took place in the course of our visit on school and church questions, takes quite a nationalistic Romanian line. I am, of course, unable to judge his administrative and political capacities, but on the whole he made a good impression, although he seemed perhaps a little too authoritative in his personal dealings with people. Accompanied by the Prefect, and, as far as I remember, the Mayor, we went to a number of schools and churches, and as everything was exceedingly well organized, we were able to see a very large number of institutions in the course of the morning. We visited the Catholic Institution kept by the Sisters of St. Vincent, a Roman Catholic normal school for boys, a Jewish lycee, the Hungarian theatre, the Communal Library, and a Jewish Orthodox Primary School. M. Hoden and M. Azcarate took notes. In one of the places we visited, I was approached by a man (Dr. G. Tabry, redacteur du journal Nagyvrad), who said that he represented a Hungarian Society in Oradea Mare, and that the Society some time ago had had difficulties with the authorities because they wanted to celebrate the memory of Petfy. The authorities had cut down the programme considerably, and in the eyes of Dr. Tabry, gone far too far. As Dr. Tabry also mentioned the state of siege, I asked the Prefect whether that meant that the civil authority or the authority of the courts was in any way curtailed or hampered by the military authority. The Prefect said that this was not at all the case. The state of siege might be considered more as a warning to the population than as an alteration of the administrative powers. As for the rest, I shall refer to M. Hodens and M. Azcarates notes. We lunched at the house of the Prefect. Some 20 persons were present, and the Prefect told me beforehand that we should have no repetition of the difficulties which had arisen in Cluj. We had also seen most of these persons during our morning tour. The following is a list: The Prefect and Madame Peter Dr. Josif Moskovits (ancien Snateur et chef du Parti de Tisza) Dr. Nicolae Zigre (ancien prfet, ancien sous-scrtaire dEtat a lIntrieur) M. Sulyok Stefan (vque rform) M. Miska Moskovits (ancien deput hongrois) General Teodorescu (commandant de la 2-eme division de chasseurs) Dr. Coriolan Bucico (Mayor) M. Jonescu M. Valeria Jurca magistrat M. Ioan Ilea M. Lecca Episcopul Bjelik (vque catholique) Dr. Havanyi Juliu (recteur de lAcadmie de Droit) Dr. Magier Aurelian (archiprtre orthodoxe) M. Nicolae Popovici (ancien prfet) M. Maternyi Imre (vque lutherien) M. Pteancu M. Desideriu Tempeleanu (sous-prfet)

Dr. Kecskemti Lipot (grand Rabbin) Dr. Benjamin Fuchs (grand Rabbin) The luncheon was quite a success, as the representatives of the different churches and races present seemed to be on quite friendly terms. The Prefect made a nice speech for the League of Nations, to which I replied. After lunch, we proceeded in automobile to Salonta Mare, where we visited the museum of the Hungarian Jnos Arany, and then went to one or two churches, where we saw the priests, and finally to the Mayors Hall, where a large gathering of municipal councilors was present. On this occasion, as on all similar occasions, I consulted several persons about the conditions of language, school and church questions, and conditions of life in general. We dined with a number of the municipal councilors and some other persons and left Salonta Mare the same evening for Arad, sleeping in the train. During my discussions with the Prefect, M. Peter, he told me that it was correct that the nationality of the shareholders in banking societies and other societies should be Romanian, but that that did not mean of Romanian race, but only Romanian citizens. He had himself collaborated in founding such societies, and seemed perfectly sure about this. M. Peter also told me that I was rightly informed when I told him that the National Bank had been somewhat strict in granting money to some banks belonging to the Minorities, but, in his opinion, this was based upon special conditions in each case, and did not indicate a policy unfavorable to the Minorities. The intention of the Government in restricting payment to certain banks had been to prevent hard currency speculations. I should also mention that M. Peter insisted several times on the fundamental importance of good administration in these provinces. He said confidentially that there was a scheme advocated by one of the members of the Government under which the Prefects should be chosen from a grup of persons agreeable to the Government for political reasons. M. Peter thought this was very dangerous and asked me whether I could not mention his opinion to M. Duca, whom he knew very well. I said that I agreed with him that the system seemed to be unwise in present circumstances, and that I would in some form or other try to find an opportunity of mentioning it to M. Duca. M. Peter also told me that he was to leave his Prefecture, about which he was not altogether happy. His wife, however, told me that his absence would, she thought, be short, and that he would come back. E. C. 4 / 8 / 23 * ** On August 4th we arrived at Arad, and were met at the station by the Prefect, M. Georgescu, the Mayor, the Prefect of Police, and a Captain. After breakfast, we went out to visit a number of church, school and other social institutions. M. Azcarate and M. Hoden took notes. I found, that, as in all the other places we have visited in this part of the country, the school and church buildings were extremely well fitted out with material for instruction. I was told afterwards by somebody that the Hungarian Government had laid great stress on having the very best Hungarian schools in this part of the country for the sake of propaganda, and

that even the schools in Budapest were not always so well fitted out and had not always as good buildings as these schools. One of the schools we visited was a large lycee for the education of future women teachers. The directrice told me that the building, which was very nice and very well fitted out with the necessary teaching material, had been occupied by a Hungarian school, but had been taken over by the Romanian State and transformed into a lycee for girls. M. Jonescu explained to me that only very few Hungarians had wanted the school and that those who needed the instruction previously given there were afforded facilities for obtaining such instruction at other schools where the Hungarian language was used. M. Diano told me that the King and Queen would pass through Arad that morning, and asked whether I would like to go down to the station and see them. I thought this was a good plan, and we all went down. We had a short talk with the King and also saluted the Queen. The King asked me whether I had seen everything I wanted and I confirmed this to be the case, and said that we had seen everything it was possible to see in so short a time, and that we were very grateful for the facilities given to us, which had enabled us to get such a good knowledge of Romanian conditions. From the station we went to see a big locomotive and railway car factory. The Director [R. Soepkez] showed us round. He told me that he had been the Director of the factory since before the war. He said that he was a Hungarian. I think he was a Hungarian Jew. The workmen numbered about 2,000. No distinction was made between different races or religions, and a great number of the workmen were Hungarian. This also applied to the officials of the works. The Director also told me that the works were almost independent of imports from abroad. They had wood, iron and coal in the country and most other things they needed. They produced themselves most of the component parts of their products. He also said that they were now executing repairs for the Romanian Government, but they had no orders just now for the construction of new locomotives. I asked him whether the Government would ever go abroad with their orders before giving him and his company an opportunity of competing. He said that his company would certainly be given the order before any foreign company. As to the constitution of the company, an important part of the shares were in the hands of an Italian [Camillo Castiglioni]. We then lunched at a hotel with the Prefect and other persons, including M. Tomulescu, the Deputy of the district. The wife of the Prefect was also present. She told me that her brother had married a Norwegian lady, and part of the conversation turned on the relations between Romania and Norway during the war, and the reception given to Romanians in different countries during that time. M. Tomulescu expressed his great appreciation of the way in which Romanians had been received in Norway. After lunch we motored to Pecica, which is a large village with partly a Hungarian, partly a Romanian population. We were received by the Hungarian part of the inhabitants first, and I had a short talk with their priest, who told me that full religious liberty existed and that the two halves of the population lived very well together. The Hungarian language was used in the church and the school. We then went to the Romanians, who were some hundred meters from the first place, and I also there discussed with the priest. He confirmed in all details what his colleague in the Hungarian church had said and emphasized the good relationship between the different parts of the population.

In both places several hundred people were present. We were taken into what I might call their town hall, and it was obvious that the inhabitants took a very great interest in our visit. In this as in some other cases, it was perhaps difficult to say whether the interest was because of the presence of the Prefect, or whether it was due to the presence of the officials of the League of Nations, or whether perhaps the peasants did not have any absolutely clear idea of the purpose of the gatherings. The discussion I always had with different persons present, however, always gave me the impression that at any rate the leaders of the inhabitants were fully aware of our character as a delegation from the League of Nations, and in speeches made on many occasions the League of Nations was particularly mentioned. When we were photographed, which was a very frequent occurrence the officials of the Secretariat were always placed in the foreground, the Prefect and the Mayor standing behind. We then motored out to the Hungarian frontier through the pusta (steppe), and back again to Arad, and further on to Pncota, where we dined and slept. During these different excursions, I discussed with different persons who were with us the ethnographical character of the places we went through, and of the neighborhood. I was informed and had to some extent an opportunity of verifying myself that, although we were quite near the frontier, the population was by no means a block of Magyars. On the contrary, many Romanians live here and constitute a considerable element of the population. I was also told by M. Tomulescu and others that a considerable number of Romanians live on the other side of the frontier. E. C. 5 / 8 / 23 * ** On Sunday, August 5th, we had an excursion through the country to a place called Mini, where we were received by a great crowd of Romanians and Saxons. The whole way along the route from Pncota to Mini, the tramway line by which we went was lined with houses, and the architecture of these houses as well as the costumes of the inhabitants made it obvious that the people were essentially Romanian. The same applied in Mini. We there visited a school for wine cultivation and a big wine and spirit factory. The director of the latter was a Schwab, as also were not a few of the villagers, although they were in an absolute minority as towards the Romanians. I spoke with several persons (here, as elsewhere in Transylvania, the language I could use with the greatest success was German), and asked them about their position. I was told that their economic position was in general good, which is, I believe, due to the fact that the district is an excellent wine district. The two branches of the population, the Romanians and the Schwabes, live together, I understood, quite happily, and without appreciable friction. After returning by tram to Pncota, we proceeded to S-ta Ana, [Sntana] where we were received by large crowds. This is a Schwabe town, almost exclusively inhabited by Schwabe peasants. They looked extremely well-off. In reply to a question from me, I was told that here almost everyone was a millionaire. The peasants have their own land and house, and the financial position of the town is very good. I was told that next autumn they were going to put asphalt on all the pavements. It was when I asked how they could afford this under the present difficult economic conditions that I was given the answer that almost everybody there was a millionaire.

We were received by the Mayor and other preeminent persons of the town, as well as by the Roman Catholic priest. A full programme for our reception had been made out, including the firing of a salute by the Municipal Guard, a very fine troop of peasants, dressed in what was, I believe, their particular Saxon uniform. Accompanied by the Catholic priest, we went to the Church. On this occasion, as on many others, the Prefect and the authorities with us kept in the background, making it quite obvious that it was the members of the Secretariat who were the guests of the town and not the Romanian authorities. The Church was full of people, several hundred. It was a very nice church building. The service had not absolutely finished, but had been postponed until our arrival. It was conducted entirely in German, and the textbooks were in that language. We then went to visit the house of one of the peasants, and found every sign of economic prosperity and well-being. I feel convinced that so far this house was by no means exceptional. We lunched at the house of the Mayor, where the Catholic priest made, in German, an eloquent speech for the King. In his speech he expressed a strong feeling of loyalty on the part of the Schwabe population towards the Royal house. He mentioned that the King himself had German blood in his veins. He said that the Schwabes were firmly decided to be good and loyal citizens of Greater Romania. To me he said, both before and after the speech, that there everybody lived happily together, and had no complaints. I asked one or two persons whether the Agrarian Reform had not interfered with the quiet life of the peasants, and was told that this was not the case, as, with the exception of between 20 and 30 people, they all had land, and as far as these 20 or 30 were concerned, facilities were contemplated for giving them land elsewhere if required. From S-ta Ana we motored back to Arad, where M. Pteancu and M. Tomulescu left us, as well as the other persons who had been with us, with the exception of the Prefect and his wife who went on with us to Temesvar. Here M. Azcarate left us to take the train for Geneva. M. Hoden returned to Arad to take the train for Budapest, and Miss Harris and I, with M. Jonescu, M. Diano and M. Lecca, went back to Bucharest. At Temesvar we had too short a time to make any study. E. C. 5 / 8 / 23 * ** On the morning of Monday, August 6th, we arrived at Bucharest. I lunched with M. Lecca and M. Jurascu, of the Foreign Ministry. The discussion was of no particular importance, but I might mention the point that both of these gentlemen have been the victims of the Agrarian Reform, and that M. Lecca, in particular, complained rather bitterly at seeing the estates which have been in his family for a very long time now going out of their hands. They both agreed that the expropriation was equal to confiscation, as the indemnity paid was very, very small. It amounted to about 2 1/2% of the real value, and was paid in State Bonds, which themselves were quoted at about 4o% of their value. Thus the indemnity was hardly more than 1% of the real market value. M. Duca was not in Bucharest, and would not arrive until the following day. I therefore spent most of the afternoon in the company of M. Jonescu, who went with me shopping, and we discussed once more a number of the questions we had previously gone through.

At dinner, Miss Harris and I were the guests of the Secretary-General of the Foreign Ministry, M. Filodor, M. Diamandi, M. Jonescu, M. Arion, M. Jurascu, M. Diano and M. Lecca were also present. I presented to M. Filodor the heartiest thanks of myself and my colleagues for all the facilities given to us during our journey, and said that we had seen and got into touch with everybody we wanted to see on this occasion, and that, in spite of the very short time at our disposal, I thought we had got a very good general view on political, social, economic and other conditions of those parts of Romania through which we had traveled. I congratulated M. Arion on his appointment as a Minister. He will still remain as the head of the Press Section of the Foreign Ministry. His appointment is therefore, at any rate for the time being, of an honorary character only. M. Filodor asked me what was my general impression as to the exactitude of the statements in the different petitions we had received, now had been on the spot. I answered that I had been able to verify that the petitions were in many points exaggerated, and even in some points gave quite a false impression. My feeling was that the general tendency of the policy of the Romanian Government towards its Minorities was much better than I had expected but that of course certain questions of greater or less importance might still give rise to difficulties. I thought that the best solution for all such difficulties was the establishment of the very best administration in the provinces where the Minorities lived in a greater proportion. M. Filodor said that he quite realized this, but the trouble was that Romania had not as yet trained administrators in a sufficient number. Romania was from an administrative point of view a very young State, even old Romania, and when they had had to administer a much larger area they had felt a considerable lack of suitable administrators. I said that to my mind it was vital that the utmost effort should be made to send the very best Prefects and other administrative officials to these provinces, irrespective of their political views. I believe M. Filodor agreed, but I do not know whether his position in the Foreign Ministry enables him to exercise any influence on the Government in this matter. I am inclined to think that this is not the case. I gave M. Jonescu a copy of the papers given to me at Cluj, saying that I did not intend to forward them officially to his Government. E. C. 7 / 8 / 23 * ** On August 7th, I got an appointment with M. Duca for the same afternoon. I spent most of the morning working at the hotel, and then went to lunch with M. Lecca and M. Jurascu. The discussion with them was more or less of the same character as on the previous day, turning round the Agrarian Reform question in particular. In the afternoon I called on M. Duca in the Foreign Ministry. He received me with the utmost friendliness, and, if as I take it for granted, reports had already been submitted to him on our journey, these reports must certainly have been very appreciative of the way in which the members of the Secretariat have worked. I thanked M. Duca for the facilities afforded to us and for the hospitality given by the Romanian Government to us all.

I said that the principal purpose of our visit to Romania had been to establish direct contact between the Romanian Government and the Secretariat of the League of Nations, and that I thought that that purpose had been attained. M. Duca said he was sure that this had been done, and he only hoped that I would understand that I was welcome in Romania at any time, and should always be given every facility to see and hear everything I wanted to see and hear. I then went on to say that as far as the particular aspect of my work, the Minorities problem, was concerned, I was glad to state that I had made a rich collection of information, and that I felt convinced that in such a short time I could not have seen or heard more than I had. The program for our journey had proved to be exceedingly well thought out, although a little strenuous. M. Diano and M. Lecca had been exceedingly helpful, and I thought that a great feeling of cordiality had been established between them and all of us from the Secretariat. We had spoken quite frankly to each other during the journey. I thanked M. Duca for having attached them to our mission. I also asked M. Duca whether he would be good enough to convey to the Ministers for Public Worship and Public Instruction my best thanks for having sent M. Jonescu and M. Pteancu with us. M. Duca said that he would certainly do this. I then said that as M. Pteancu was not particularly strong in foreign languages, it had not been very easy to discuss with him, but that M. Jonescu, whose excellent qualities I underlined, had helped us also with the school questions, and not only with the church questions, which were his particular field. I said that it had been a great pleasure to me to see how M. Jonescu was everywhere received as a friend, as a man whose unbiased and impartial views could not be challenged, even where as in some cases, the persons with whom we came in contact did not agree with him. I should only have thought that his excellent qualities might be still more useful if he had to deal also with school questions. M. Duca said that he quite appreciated this, but the trouble was that the schools were not only confessional schools, but [also] State schools and private schools, and that it had therefore been found necessary that the whole school problem should come under the Ministry of Public Instruction. I also mentioned the great help the Prefects and other authorities had given us during our journey, and said that as the Prefects could probably not make propaganda in their own favor with the Government, I would like to state that the reception we had got was always exceedingly good, and that the arrangements made on our behalf were excellent. I added that some of these Prefects had struck me as being very able men. I did not, however, mention names. I gave M. Duca a very brief survey of the way in which we had proceeded to our work; how we had been received by great crowds, by the officials, by representatives of the churches, schools, etc. and how we had visited a number of schools and churches and other social institutions; how we had acquainted ourselves with the general local conditions in the different places, etc... I mentioned the great difference, which to me prevailed between the Minorities problem in those parts of the country bordering on Hungary, and in the rest of the country. It should be very easy for the Government to show particular liberality towards the Szeklers and the Saxons, on whose part any idea of irredentism was geographically impossible. I mentioned the excellent impression I had got during our visit to S-ta Ana, and also the importance of having a clear conception of the real ethnographical conditions on both sides of the frontier with Hungary, where, as I had found, the population was by no means so compact a Magyar one as I had previously believed. I also mentioned our discussion at Cluj with the representatives of the Minorities churches, and the presence of M. Ugron, and said

that I had been induced by the misunderstanding that prevailed about the purpose of our visit to explain to them the real character of that visit. M. Duca asked me to say quite frankly what desires I now had to express on the Minorities problem, or any other problem concerning the League. I answered that of course my brain was not as yet quite normal, after having received such an enormous wealth of impressions of all kinds. I had to try to bring some order into all these impressions before I could say what were the specific points that might be in need of further consideration, or demand further information from the Romanian Government, but I could say now that, in general, my impressions were much more favorable than I had dared to hope when basing myself on the documentation I had had before arriving there. I had had the very best opportunity of seeing how utterly impossible it is to arrive at a really true conception of such complicated questions without personal contact with the country and the people concerned. The journey had therefore been a great success, and I should now feel much better placed when giving schools would in no way depart from the general principles of liberality and consideration towards the Minorities which he so strongly advocated, and which were the policy of the Government. The Romanian Government, he said, does not adopt this policy for the sake of the Minorities as such, but because it knows that it is in the interest of Romania that all her citizens should be dealt with in such a way as to enable them to be satisfied and loyal to the State. On the other hand, he thought that the present position, as far as certain leaders of the Magyar Minority were concerned, was that whatever concessions were made they would still complain. They, or their families, had been for hundreds of years the rulers of the country and it was hard for them now to accept the new state of affairs. I then mentioned the draft law on the unification of the administration of Romania, and said that that law was of considerable interest also in so far as the consolidation of the country was concerned. I asked whether I could have a copy. M. Duca promised to let me have one, and I got it even before I left the Ministry. I said that I had received from M. Jonescu a copy of the last church budget, which had interested me very much, and that I would like to have also a copy of the school budget. I had asked M. Pteancu for it, but as he had left us at Arad and had forgotten to give me a copy I had asked M. Jonescu to do so, and thought it would be forwarded to the Foreign Ministry to be sent on to me if I did not receive it before I left. M. Duca said that I should certainly have whatever I wanted. When I then said that I had found the Agrarian Reform question at the bottom of most of the particular difficulties in church and school questions, M. Duca replied that the State dealt as generously as its finances allowed with the Minorities institutions also from the financial point of view. I said that it would be of considerable assistance to me when explaining the position in Geneva or elsewhere to have statistics showing how much land had been expropriated, how much of this had been distributed up to now, and how much to the different races of the country. I had already from several sources, including from M. Duca himself, the information that no distinction had been made between the races, and that the distribution of expropriated landed property to the peasants meant in many cases the fortification of the racial element of the Minority. This was a very important point to be able to back with statistics. M. Duca said that he would arrange for me to have such statistics. M. Duca then said that he wondered whether he ought to translate and distribute to the Members of the Assembly the 3 memoranda he had given me a fortnight ago on school, church and Agrarian Reform questions. I said that I thought these papers were admirable, and

that it would be a very good thing to have them communicated to the Members of the League and the Assembly, but it really seemed to be reasonable for the Secretariat to do this and insert the information on Romanian questions and, in particular, Romanian Minorities problems to Members of the Council or the Assembly. I took it for practically certain that in view of the visit I had now paid to Romania, and in view of the intimate collaboration now established between the Romanian Government and the officials of the League, there would be no question of bringing the Minorities problem of Romania before the Council on the initiative of any of its Members. M. Duca asked whether I thought it wise to have M. Jonescu with the Delegation at Geneva during the Assembly. I said that I really did not think that was necessary, and that if nevertheless a question came up which I was not personally able to deal with satisfactorily, I certainly would approach the Romanian Delegation and it would then be time enough to consider whether M. Jonescu should come or not. I then went on to say that the complaints I had heard during the journey were in general the same, as I already knew from petitions. Very, very little new had been brought before me. I had the impression that in church questions the complaints were of no great importance, but that also on these questions a certain fear for the future prevailed. I had, however, ascertained that the law on the church was to be promulgated in the near future had been drawn up in very close collaboration with the Minorities churches themselves and I understood that I was the intention once more to submit the draft to them before finally bringing should certainly have whatever I wanted. When I then said that I had found the Agrarian Reform question at the bottom of most of the particular difficulties in church and school questions, M. Duca replied that the State dealt as generously as its finances allowed with the Minorities institutions also from the financial point of view. I said that it would be of considerable assistance to me when explaining the position in Geneva or elsewhere to have statistics showing how much land had been expropriated, how much of this had been distributed up to now, and how much to the different races of the country. I had already from several sources, including from M. Duca himself, the information that no distinction had been made between the races, and that the distribution of expropriated landed property to the peasants meant in many cases the fortification of the racial element of the Minority. This was a very important point to be able to back with statistics. M. Duca said that he would arrange for me to have such statistics. M. Duca then said that he wondered whether he ought to translate and distribute to the Members of the assembly the 3 memoranda he had given me a fortnight ago on school, church and Agrarian Reform questions. I said that I thought these papers were admirable, and that it would be a very good thing to have them communicated to the Members of the League and the Assembly, but it really seemed to be reasonable for the Secretariat to do this and insert the documents in the Official Journal. If he agreed, I would read the papers through once more carefully so as to see that they were in every respect fit for publication, and then arrange to have them published as son as possible. M. Duca said that he entirely agreed. I then mentioned to him the letter I had received from M. Grg while in Suseni on July 29th, and the answer I had sent him. M. Duca said he would like me to have seen M. Grg, but that he entirely agreed to my reply. M. Duca asked me in what form I thought the liaison with the Secretariat could now be arranged through the Minister of Romania in Berne. I said that the simplest thing would be to write a letter to the Secretary-General, stating that the Romanian Government had appointed

the Minister in Berne their permanent representative to the League and to be particularly in charge of the correspondence between the Government and the League. This arrangement would of course not prevent the Government from not including the Minister in their Assembly delegation, nor from not using him in any given case as their spokesman in the Council. M. Duca asked me to arrange with M. Filodor that a letter of this kind should be prepared. He then asked whether it was possible to have more than 3 delegates to the Assembly, that is whether in addition to the 3, an assistant delegated could be appointed. I said that nothing prevented the appointment of technical or assistant delegates, and these delegates would, if their Government so desired, be given a seat in a Commission. I have given M. Duca a copy of the Office Circular concerning the appointment of one Member of Section in the International Bureaux Section. M. Duca asked me to give him some time to consider the matter. (I had not thought it desirable to mention this matter on my arrival a fortnight ago, as I then understood that there was a certain feeling against the Secretariat because of the position of M. Lahovary, and it might then have been considered rather a small compensation to have offered the appointment of a man to hold office for 2 years only. In particular I wanted to wait and see whether I might find somebody, without first submitting the matter to the Ministry. In this, however, I did not succeed). Finally M. Duca asked me to write freely to him on any question of interest, and in answer to my question he said that of course I could write unofficially. This was the very best way of handling such questions as those of which I was in charge. When I left, M. Duca once more and in very definite terms renewed the assurance that the Romanian Government was very satisfied that we had come and he added that when he said au revoir, he did not mean to Geneva (although he hoped he might perhaps be able to come to the Assembly), but to Romania. I still had to go to Bessarabia as he had told me before. M. Duca said that as M. Lecca had already told me he had very much wanted me to dine with him that night, but as M. Lecca had informed him that I was anxious to get back to my work in Geneva he would not insist. I then went to see M. Filodor and besides saying good-bye also spoke about the letter to the Secretary-General accrediting the Minister in Berne as permanent representative to the League. I said that they would of course consider whether it would be desirable for them to ask for a special copy of printed and documents to be sent direct to Bucharest. M. Arion, whom I then saw, told me that he hoped that something good would come out of his connection with the Information Section of the Secretariat. He was very interested that the liaison should be as good as possible. I then said good-bye to M. Jurascu, M. Diano and M. Lecca. I asked M. Diano whether I ought to leave cards for anybody in the Ministry or elsewhere for myself and for M. Hoden and M. Azcarate. He said that that was quite unnecessary. I had personally called in the Ministry on all those I had been in immediate contact with, and the Minister himself would convey my compliments to the Ministers of Public Worship and Public Instruction. As far as M. Hoden and M. Azcarate were concerned, everybody knew that they had not come back to Bucharest. The same afternoon M. Jonescu, whom I had not been able to call upon in the morning, came to see me at the hotel. We had 1/2 hours talk on different questions. I told him that M. Duca had suggested that perhaps he should come to Geneva, but that I had replied that that was not necessary at any rate for the time. He said he was in full agreement with my attitude.

During our conversation, which could not have been more frank if we had known each other for years, he quite clearly let me understand that he thought that the right thing would be to put him in charge of the Minorities schools also. I do not, however, believe that he will take any action in order to have this settled, but it is at any rate good to know that this is his opinion if the question should be brought up by M. Duca with his colleague, the Minister of Public Instruction, as the result of my suggestion to M. Duca. I am, however, not inclined to think that M. Duca will for the present take any action. I believe he will wait and see what comes out of the school law. But even if the school law finally proves to be satisfactory, very, very much will depend upon its execution, and to my belief no better man than M. Jonescu could be found to be put in charge of this delicate task. The present situation, at any rate, is not administratively satisfactory if it is true, as I was told, that the Minister of Public Instruction is a well-known surgeon, and his second in command in these questions is M. Pteancu. With all his personal good qualities and his indisputable honesty, M. Pteancu had hardly the administrative capacity now wanted. The Ministry of Public Instruction seems to be pouring out decrees almost as fast as certain Governments are pouring out paper money, and the result will easily be an analogous one: depreciation of the value of the decrees and disorganization of the school administration. However, much of this will of course be put right when we get the new school law. Miss Harris and I dined with M. Diano and M. Lecca before leaving Bucharest for Geneva. They were both, I think, glad to see the end of the very hard task they had had to pilot us for a fortnight, but I also feel confident that their feelings towards us were very friendly. M. Lecca, who is on the surface something of a cynic, showed another side at the last minute when he pleaded the case of Romania and asked me not to forget on the one side her difficulties and on the other her honest desire to take her seat among the most civilized nations. I told M. Diano that the intention I had previously mentioned of sending letters of thanks to the Prefects and perhaps one or two other persons who had been particularly helpful to us during our journey still held good, and that of course I would send them all through the Foreign Ministry, so that they might see everything I did in this connection. He said that that was excellent, as it would also facilitate the letters reaching the people for whom they were intended. E. C. 8 / 8 / 23
Archive de la Socit des Nationes Genve, 41/30120/1481

1. ERIK COLBAN

NOTE PRELIMINARE (1923)

CONFIDENIAL Domnului Secretar general [al Ligii Naiunilor], Iat notele mele preliminare, inute n forma unui jurnal, asupra cltoriei mele n Romnia1. Am intenia ca, atunci cnd voi fi obinut notele dl. Azcarate i dl. Hoden2, s pregtesc o nou lucrare, mai scurt, care eventual ar putea fi nmnat unora dintre membrii Consiliului.

Totui aceast lucrare nu poate fi gata pn cndva n cursul sptamnii viitoare, cnd v-o propun spre naintare. E. C. 13 / 8 / 23 * ** Am ajuns la Bucureti la 24 iulie, n jurul orelor 8 seara, i la gar am fost ntmpinai de dl. Iancovici3, care este delegatul romn la Comisia Mixt Temporar i la Comitetul pentru alocarea Costurilor Ligii, de dl. Dianu4, consilier al Legaiei n Ministerul de Externe, de dl. Lecca5, prim-secretar n acelai minister. Am fost condui la hotel, unde dl. Arion, eful Seciei de pres a Ministerului de Externe, ne-a ieit nainte i ne-a spus c secretarul general al Ministerului de Externe, dl. Filodor, dorete s ne ntlneasc la cin. Cina s-a desfurat ntr-un mod destul de neprotocolar i dup cteva minute s-a nstpnit o senzaie de uurare i de cordialitate. Cu toate acestea, era evident c romnii aflai de fa (dl. Filodor, dl. Arion, dl. Dianu i dl. Lecca) la nceput nu tiau la ce s se atepte de la noi i ce intenii avem. De aceea, atunci cnd dl. Filodor m-a ntrebat dup cteva minute care va fi programul vizitei noastre, am folosit ocazia pentru a-i explica, aa cum fcusem i la Lausanne n faa dl. Diamandy6, i mai nainte n faa dl. Titulescu, c noi ne punem total la dispoziia Guvernului romn, c simind o oarecare lips de contact considerm c stabilirea unei mai bune legturi ar fi de dorit. Am spus c sper c dl. Filodor, care are la dispoziie toate legaiile i consulatele Romniei, va gsi c este n interesul rii sale s includ i sediile Ligii Naiunilor pe lista instituiilor folositoare rii sale. Secretariatul, suficient de informat asupra chestiunilor romneti, nu numai c ar putea colabora cu Guvernul Romniei pentru a face ca politica Romniei s fie mai bine apreciat n toat lumea, dar poate c experii notri tehnici n toate domeniile ar fi n stare s aduc Romniei servicii considerabile. Cu toii eram nerbdtori s fim ct mai de folos cu putin, spernd c dl. Filodor i Guvernul su i vor privi pe funcionarii Secretariatului ca fiind tot att de mult la dispoziia lor precum sunt ei la dispoziia oricrui alt guvern. Dl. Filodor a ntrebat dac intenionm s mergem n Transilvania. Am rspuns c aceasta, firete, depinde de ceea ce Guvernul Romniei consider c este nelept, dar cu certitudine nou, Secretariatului Ligii, ne-ar fi de mare folos s cunoatem ara ct se poate de bine, aa nct s putem nelege ct mai temeinic toate variile i destul de complexele probleme ale politicii romneti. Eu tiam din experien c, orict de bun ar fi fost materialul pe baza cruia eu trebuia s ajung la nelegerea problemelor unor ri strine, totui de cel mai mare ajutor mi era cunoaterea rii nsi. Chiar dac o scurt vizit n Transilvania ar fi n mod necesar superficial i de scurt durat, cu siguran ea mi-ar permite ulterior s apreciez mai bine dect poate a fi fcut-o pn atunci ansamblul poziiei acestei pri a Romniei. Cnd Guvernul Romniei a scris expos-uri asupra diferitelor sale probleme, desigur c a luat drept de la sine nelese multe lucruri care poate nu sunt cunoscute n acelai mod i de ctre strini. Prin urmare este foarte posibil ca i cel mai bun expos romnesc s nu ia exact n considerare lipsa de cunotine i de nelegere existent n strintate fa de problemele sale. Multe nenelegeri ar putea fi nlturate dac funcionarii Secretariatului Ligii ar intra n contact strns cu Romnia i ar nva s vad lucrurile n lumina celei mai depline nelegeri, pe care numai contactul personal o poate aduce.

Dl. Arion a fcut o remarc cu privire la problema minoritilor, i eu am spus c, ntruct atinsese chestiunea, nu vedeam nici un motiv de a-mi ascunde opinia n legtur cu acest subiect, care [opinie] este aceea c prin tratatele de pace nu fusese posibil s se ndeplineasc n toate consecinele sale principiul autodeterminrii, i de aceea un considerabil numr de persoane aparinnd unor minoriti rasiale, religioase sau lingvistice se afl plasate sub alt suveranitate dect aceea pe care poate i-ar fi ales-o singure. Aceasta creeaz o situaie ce deschide calea iredentismului i interferenei rilor vecine sau a Marilor Puteri. Istoria a artat c o astfel de situaie fusese foarte periculoas pentru prezervarea deplinei suveraniti a statelor Europei rsritene i centrale, iar eu cred c este o fericit soluie aranjamentul prin care revine Ligii Naiunilor soluionarea dificultilor ivite din prezena n teritoriu a statelor noi sau lrgite i avnd minoriti considerabile. La drept vorbind, Liga Naiunilor canalizeaz toate dificultile i mpiedic statele nvecinate i Marile Puteri de a trece la aciuni puternice, independente i ostile. Pentru mine este limpede c Liga nu poate oferi asisten minoritilor n nici o aciune care s fie contrar unitii i consolidrii statului. Loialitatea persoanelor aparinnd minoritilor este esenial. Este important de reamintit c tratatele minoritilor vorbesc numai despre minoriti rasiale, religioase i lingvistice, i c minoritile politice i minoritile sociale nu constituie obiectul proteciei din partea Ligii. Eu mi-am exprimat sperana c guvernele avnd diferite interese vor cuta s creeze pe propriul lor sol asemenea condiii pentru minoritile lor, nct iredentismul s nu poat fi aat, i n civa ani, poate n foarte puini ani, problema minoritilor s nu mai fie o problem n majoritatea acestor ri. Pe scurt, problema minoritilor este un aspect al problemelor granielor, iar protecia minoritilor nseamn ntrirea frontierelor aa cum au fost ele stabilite prin tratate. Dl. Filodor a prut s fie plcut surprins de majoritatea afirmaiilor mele, i dup un timp a nceput s vorbeasc cu mult mai mult franchee dect la nceput. A spus c dorina Ministerului este aceea ca noi s vedem ct mai multe posibil, pentru a putea judeca noi nine condiiile din Romnia. De asemenea, dl. Arion a insistat mereu asupra necesitii ca noi s mergem n diferite pri ale rii, s vorbim cu toat lumea, i s ne facem propria noastr prere independent. i-a exprimat certitudinea c aceast opinie va fi n ansamblu favorabil Romniei. Dl. Lecca a preluat aceeai linie. A spus c el nu va zice c ar fi corect cutare sau cutare tez romneasc. El vrea doar ca eu s nregistrez orice critic sau plngere existente, s merg la faa locului, s fac singur investigaii i apoi s-i spun ceea ce cred. El nu-mi cere altceva mai mult dect s neleg pe deplin problemele rii sale. Am spus atunci c el a atins un punct important i c, de fapt, deplina nelegere a numeroaselor probleme dificile ivite dup rzboi este extrem de necesar pentru funcionarii Secretariatului Ligii Naiunilor, dac dorim s ne ocupm cu succes de aceste probleme. Eu i-am dat toate asigurrile c realizez enormele dificulti ivite n faa Guvernului romn n urma rzboiului i a prelurii de mari provincii. Aici dl. Filodor a intervenit i a spus c, mai exact nu este vorba de preluarea de noi provincii, ntruct Romnia nu intrase cu fora n ele, ci doar acceptase uniunea din propria voin a locuitorilor lor. Am spus c eu am cunotin despre Adunarea de la Alba Iulia, i c nu voiam deloc s spun c Guvernul romn dobndise noile provincii n contradicie cu dorinele majoritii locuitorilor. Cnd am spus preluare, am folosit doar o expresie tehnic, nelegnd prin aceasta c Romnia i extinsese suveranitatea asupra acestor provincii: i pentru a reveni la ceea ce tocmai afirmasem, doream s art c ntotdeauna fusesem de prere c este teribil de greu s administrezi noi provincii cu populaia lor amestecat imediat dup un mare rzboi i fr a avea de la nceput necesarele

cadre de funcionari i necesara baz financiar. De aceea sunt mai nclinat s admir munca de construcie deja efectuat, dect s evideniez ceea ce n unele cazuri s-ar fi putut face altfel. n ochii mei ceea ce conteaz este tendina general a politicii Guvernului. De asemenea, am vorbit mult despre munca de propagand care ne st n fa. S-a czut de acord c dl. Hoden urmeaz s-l caute pe dl. Arion i s discute cu el posibilitatea unei legturi mai strnse ntre Secia de informare a Secretariatului i Secia de pres a Ministerului de Externe de aici. Alt chestiune atins a fost situaia Basarabiei. Dl. Lecca mi-a explicat c masa locuitorilor Basarabiei sunt romni i c elementul rus este foarte mic. Singura minoritate de o oarecare nsemntate o reprezint evreii, care, totui, par destul de fericii cu noua stare de lucruri. n timpul unei excursii pe care am fcut-o mpreun a doua zi, dl. Lecca a revenit la chestiunea basarabean i mi-a explicat c ea nu constituie o problem de dificultate pentru Romnia, atta timp ct Rusia nu-i reia vechea politic de a ncerca crearea unui pod pn jos la Constantinopol peste teritoriul romnesc, ns Rusia nu va avea niciodat un pretext serios bazat pe consideraii de naionalitate. Basarabia este un vechi teritoriu romnesc, luat prin for de Rusia prin tratatul de la Berlin i redat acum Romniei, exact n limitele hotarelor ei anterioare. E. C. 25 / 7 / 23 * ** n dimineaa lui 25 iulie, dl. Hoden a mers la Ministerul de Externe pentru a discuta cu dl. Arion chestiunea legturii ntre Secia de informare a Secretariatului i Secia de pres i propagand a Ministerului de Externe. Ceilali membri ai Secretariatului i-au petrecut dimineaa n compania dl. Lecca, vizitnd mprejurimile. Dl. Lecca i dl. Dianu ne-au invitat la prnz. Dl. Hoden a luat prnzul n particular cu dl. Iancovici. Dup-masa la orele 3. 30, dl. Hoden, dl. Azcarate i eu am fost s-l ntlnim pe ministrul de externe Duca, nsoii de domnii Lecca i Dianu. Am fost primii de ctre ministru n chipul cel mai cordial. El i-a exprimat n mod repetat n cursul conversaiei noastre bucuria de a ne vedea n Romnia i dorina ca noi s obinem maximum de informaii posibile n orice punct de interes. Dl. Duca nu prea ne-a dat prilejul s vorbim, evident pregtind el nsui de dinainte un expos general, pe care l-a susinut cu mult for i pe un ton foarte convingtor. A nceput cu ntrebarea dac ne-am fcut cumva vreun program. I-am rspuns c noi suntem la dispoziia Guvernului su, iar el a replicat zmbind c sigur c asta aa este, dar el vrea s se asigure c noi suntem absolut mulumii cu propunerile pe care vrea s ni le sugereze. Apoi ne-a propus s mergem s vedem la faa locului condiiile diferitelor minoriti din Transilvania, oprindu-ne o zi sau dou n fiecare loc; ntreaga excursie ar urma s dureze cam o sptmn de la ieirea din Sinaia i pn la intrarea n Arad. I-am spus c programul pe care-l schiase era exact aa cum ne-am fi dorit noi programul ideal i c suntem foarte bucuroi s vedem c el corespunde propriilor lui vederi. Dl. Duca a adugat c, pentru a face cltoria ct mai rodnic posibil n att de puine zile, i rugase colegii, pe ministrul Cultelor

Publice7 i pe ministrul Instruciunii Publice8, s ne primeasc n aceeai dup-mas pentru a ne oferi toate felurile de informaiile utile. De asemenea ne-ar da spre nsoire pe doi tineri funcionari ai Ministerului de Externe, domnii Lecca i Dianu. Mi-am exprimat din nou marea satisfacie. (n timpul cinei aceleiai zile, dl. Duca a mai spus c ne va da drept nsoitor n cltorie i pe directorul nsrcinat cu problemele bisericii i ale colii). Ne-a fcut invitaia de a lua cu dnsul cina n seara aceea, n compania ctorva funcionari ai Ministerului, i de a pleca la Sinaia a doua zi dup-mas. Am acceptat cu bucurie toate acestea i am adugat c poate mi-ar plcea s stau suficient de mult n Sinaia, pentru a avea ocazia s-l salut pe Dr. Benes i pe dl. Nintchitch9. El m-a ntrebat care sunt inteniile mele vizavi de familia regal. I-am rspuns c eu m gndisem c familia regal este acum foarte ocupat cu conferina de la Sinaia, i consideram de cuviin s ne nscriem numele n cartea Palatului regal, fr a mai atepta vreo evoluie ulterioar a lucrurilor. El a spus c acesta este un plan bun, dar c ia n calcul i posibilitatea de a aranja o audien la Rege. (n aceeai noapte, la dineu, mi-a spus c suntem ateptai a lua prnzul cu familia regal n smbta viitoare). Dl. Duca a spus c din punctul lui de vedere trebuie luate n considerare diferite minoriti: maghiarii, germanii i evreii. El dduse deja instruciuni s-mi fie pus la dispoziie informaia general necesar despre situaia acestor minoriti. (De fapt, nainte de a pleca el mi-a nmnat anumite documente pe acest subiect). n ceea ce privete minoritatea maghiar, care probabil prezint cele mai mari dificulti, problema este de tripl natur: chestiuni bisericeti, chestiuni colare i lingvistice, i reforma agrar. Ct despre ultima, el se gndea c dup dezbaterea chestiunii optanilor la Geneva i avnd n vedere toate informaiile deja trimise de ctre Guvernul romn, ar fi puine lucruri de adugat din partea lui. Dac eu doream s-l vd pe colegul su, ministrul Agriculturii10, nimic nu ar fi mai simplu dect aranjarea unui interviu, pe care el l credea fr rost. Am fost de acord c deja suntem n posesia tuturor informaiilor de care avem nevoie n prezent. Ct despre celelalte dou grupe de chestiuni, i-am spus c mi-ar fi de folos ntlnirea cu cei doi colegi ai si de la Ministerele Cultelor Publice i Instruciunii Publice. Mi-a cerut deschis s le pun ntrebri acelora i s nu uit s le reamintesc c este n interesul Guvernului romn s ajungem la fondul problemei pentru a ne putea forma noi nine o opinie bine ntemeiat i independent. Cu toate c era oarecum n afara scopului vizitei mele, am folosit ocazia pe care mi-a oferit-o menionnd Basarabia, i l-am ntrebat asupra vederilor sale n privina problemei basarabene. Mi-a spus c pot s fiu absolut sigur c populaia basarabean este profund romneasc. Basarabia este o veche provincie romneasc, iar locuitorii ei nu sunt nicidecum rui. Dac a traversa frontiera dintre vechea Romnie i Basarabia fr s-mi dau seama c o fac, n-a vedea nici o diferen de port i obiceiuri, ori n-a auzi nici o diferen n limba vorbit de populaia celor dou pri. ranii Basarabiei sunt toi profund romni. n orae firete c exist o reminiscen de rui, din vremea n care Basarabia fusese sub dominaie rus. Tot n orae a ntlni o considerabil minoritate compus din evrei, care, totui, nu sunt sub nici o form ostili Romniei. Atunci cnd Rusia (cred c a zis n timpul lui Petru cel Mare)11 a ncercat s colonizeze Basarabia, nu a adus rui, ci ttari i germani din sud. Rezultatul a fost c n Basarabia elementul rus nu are nsemntate deloc. Dl. Duca a adugat c dorete din suflet s-mi gsesc timp s revin, i s merg n Basarabia pentru a studia condiiile de acolo. Apoi ne-am dus s-l ntlnim pe ministrul Cultelor Publice, dl. Banu. El era asistat de 2 sau 3 domni, dintre care unul, secretarul-general al Ministerului, un brbat foarte curtenitor i prietenos vorbind excelent franceza (cum, desigur, o vorbesc majoritatea romnilor cu care

avem de-a face), a luat aferat notie cu creionul n timpul conversaiei mele cu ministrul. Ministrul a nceput prin a-mi cere s-i pun ntrebri. Numrul destul de mare al celor prezeni a fcut desigur s-mi fie imposibil s stabilesc o discuie rodnic n probleme de detaliu, aa c am mbriat o linie general, explicnd dorina membrilor Secretariatului de a fi ct mai de folos Guvernului romn, utilitatea pe care organizaiile noastre tehnice ar putea-o avea pentru ar etc. etc. n fine am atins problema minoritilor, i am spus c i n privina acestei chestiuni eu i colegii mei am fi foarte bucuroi dac Guvernul romn s-ar prevala de serviciile noastre pentru a-i face cunoscut politica n lume. Am spus c pn acum n Secia de minoriti a Secretariatului fuseserm obligai, prin fora mprejurrilor, a ne confrunta cu chestiuni ale minoritilor n mare parte pe baza plngerilor primite. Mi-am exprimat poziia c aceasta nu este bine, i mult mai de dorit ar fi ca, aa cum indicase cea de-a 30-a Adunare, s stabilim o relaie apropiat i amical cu guvernele n cauz, pentru a permite Secretariatului s pun n faa membrilor Consiliului i ai Ligii informaii utile despre toate laturile problemei minoritilor n diferitele ri, fr a omite acel aspect particular al problemei care se refer la atitudinea minoritilor nsele fa de noile state. Ministrul a explicat concis c n Romnia domnete deplina libertate de contiin, care este garantat prin Constituie. Ct despre bisericile minoritilor, costurile lor de toate tipurile sunt preluate de ctre Guvern cel puin n aceeai proporie n care statul pltete costurile Bisericii Ortodoxe, creia i aparine imensa majoritate a locuitorilor Romniei Mari. El m-a ntrebat dac am nelmuriri de detaliu. I-am rspuns c momentan cred c cel mai important lucru este s cunosc i s neleg pe deplin politica Guvernului romn fa de variile minoriti religioase. ntotdeauna fusese foarte dificil pentru mine s apreciez explicaiile oferite de ctre Guvernul romn ca replic la anumite plngeri, pentru c nu aveam n fa tabloul general al situaiei, n care s figureze situaia de la sfritul rzboiului, actuala situaie i inteniile Guvernului pe viitor. Dac cumva Ministerul su mediteaz din cnd n cnd, cum cred c este cazul, oferind opiniei publice internaionale prilejul de a afla ceea ce deja fusese realizat n Romnia i care sunt obiectivele Guvernului romn n chestiuni ecleziastice, obinerea copiilor unor asemenea note ar fi de valoare inestimabil pentru Secretariat. Am insistat destul de puternic asupra faptului c ar fi dezirabil ca Ministerul s preia ofensiva, ca s spun aa, i nu s stea pe margine ateptnd ca minoritile s-i nainteze plngerile. Ministrul a prut s aprecieze tot ce i-am spus, i dup cam o or de conversaie, n timpul creia nimeni n afar de el i de mine nu a vorbit, am prsit biroul su. Urmtoarea noastr vizit a fost la ministrul Instruciunii Publice, dl. Angelescu, care era asistat de directorul pentru colile minoritilor (dl. Pteancu). A ascultat cu uoar nerbdare scurta mea cuvntare introductiv, care urmrea firete linii foarte asemntoare cu ceea ce le spusesem deja i celorlali romni. Apoi i-a nceput propriul expos, care fusese bine pregtit dinainte, i pentru a crui expunere i explicare era dornic s aloce ct mai mult timp. Acest expos coninea n general aceleai afirmaii pe care le cunoatem din observaiile Guvernului romn asupra petiiei Societii secuieti (C. 195. M. 116, 1923. I.), oferindu-ne cifre asupra colilor (private i publice) romneti, ungureti i germane nainte de rzboi i n timpul de fa. Am pus ntr-o doar o singur ntrebare, anume n legtur cu plngerea c Guvernul romn mpiedic minoritarii de limb maghiar s urmeze coli confesionale pentru c aparin altor confesiuni. El a rspuns c faptul este corect i c el nsui emisese un decret n acest sens. Cu toate acestea este necesar s neleg condiiile: exist un mare numr de evrei n Romnia, care se consider buni romni i ceteni loiali, i care nu vor s fie amestecai cu alte minoriti. Acum dup ncorporarea Transilvaniei n Romnia Mare un numr de evrei de

limb maghiar intraser sub suveranitatea romn. Acestor evrei li se ddea posibilitatea s aleag ntre coli romneti de limb romn ca limb de instrucie pe de o parte, i coli evreieti cu ebraic sau idi ca limb de instrucie pe de alt parte. Maghiarii se plngeau mpotriva acestui fapt, spunnd c aceti evrei erau unguri i trebuiau considerai ca atare, permindu-li-se accesul la coli confesionale maghiare. Aceast alternativ nu este acceptat de Guvern, iar ministrul (dac nu l-am neles cumva greit) a spus c Organizaia evreilor din Bucureti este de acord cu el, c nu exist nici un motiv de a permite acestor evrei s-i trimit copiii la coli ungureti. Urmtoarei mele ntrebri ministrul mi-a explicat c aceast regul se aplic numai n cazul evreilor de limb maghiar care doresc s obin pentru copiii lor un certificat de absolvire a unei coli publice romneti, dar c ei nu sunt mpiedicai s foloseasc limba maghiar n coli private dac renun la dreptul de a obine asemenea certificate (Am pus aceast ntrebare de dou sau de trei ori, ns nu sunt tocmai sigur c ministrul mi-a neles pe deplin ntrebarea sau c eu i-am neles pe deplin rspunsul). Ministrul a mai spus c regula prin care copiii evreilor de limb maghiar vor primi instruciune n Romnia se va aplica n modul urmtor: de anul trecut s-a aplicat primului an de coal, de anul acesta se aplic celui de-al doilea an de coal, de anul viitor se va aplica celui de-al treilea an de coal, i, n consecin, copiii aparinnd unor ani anteriori de coal i vor continua instrucia n limba maghiar. A subliniat faptul c msura atinge numai o mic fraciune a minoritii evreieti din Romnia. Dac l-am neles corect, a zis c nu exist o situaie analog n privina ungurilor de ras maghiar i de credin diferit. Am avut impresia c, dei extrem de curtenitor i dornic de a discuta, ministrul totui nu a fost foarte bucuros s-mi dea explicaii. El a supralicitat dorina lui n acest sens, i n rstimpuri, mi tot spunea c am la dispoziie toate statisticile i documentele pe care le vreau, pentru a putea judeca i controla dac afirmaiile sale sunt corecte sau greite. Am spus c firete nu ncape vorb i nici un fel de ndoial asupra acurateei informaiei oferite de Guvernul romn. Problema este c multe lucruri sunt evidente acestui Guvern i experilor si, lucruri pe care funcionarii internaionali i guvernele strine avnd interes n aceste chestiuni probabil nu le cunosc i nu sunt capabili s le aprecieze. Obiectivul meu este acela de a dobndi cunotine personale asupra problemelor i asupra modului n care Guvernul romn consider c ele mi-ar fi de folos n a putea explica poziia real a tuturor celor interesai. De aceea m-a simi foarte obligat fa de ministru, dac mi-ar pune la dispoziie statisticile i celelalte materiale menionate, i de asemenea a fi foarte recunosctor dac pe viitor Secretariatul Ligii ar continua s fie informat. Am spus c eu cred c este tocmai n propriul interes al Romniei s explice politica pe care o duce n problema aceasta sau n altele similare, lund ca punct de pornire situaia imediat ulterioar rzboiului, i artnd apoi cum i-a construit diferitele instituii i ce intenii are pentru dezvoltarea viitoare a acestor instituii. Evident c este imposibil s consideri situaia diferitelor rase din Transilvania ca o problem similar celei a tratrii diferitelor rase care locuiesc mpreun n Londra. Trebuie luate n considerare dificultile practice cu care se confrunt Guvernul romn. Nu va exista nici un privitor imparial care s nu laude Romnia pentru uriaul efort pe care sunt sigur c l-a depus de la rzboi ncoace pentru a rezolva numeroasele i dificilele probleme care i stau n fa. Este important s priveti nainte, nu s te lai mpiedicat de fenomene anterioare. Tendina general a Guvernului romn n problema minoritilor este de interes internaional, iar n mintea mea Liga Naiunilor ar asculta de ri sftuitori dac ar prelua toate incidentele inevitabile n legtur cu care s-ar spune c a avut loc, poate tehnic vorbind, o infraciune.

n cele din urm ministrul m-a informat c, la cererea colegului su ministrul Afacerilor Externe, el i va cere directorului su pe problemele colare (sau poate pe problemele colare ale minoritilor) s ne nsoeasc n Transilvania, ca s ne poat ajuta tot timpul. n aceeai sear (ieri) am luat cina cu dl. Duca, dl. Iancovici, dl. Arion, dl. Lecca, dl. Dianu i cu un alt membru al Ministerului de Externe, i cu inspectorul general al Ministerului Instruciunii Publice (dl. Pteancu). Dl. Duca m-a informat c dl. Pteancu va veni cu noi n excursie, pentru a ne acorda asisten n toate chestiunile privind bisericile; la fel va veni directorul din Ministerul Cultelor Publice, care avnd deja un alt angajament n-a putut fi prezent la cin. n timpul cinei a fost discutat un numr de probleme generale i particulare, uneori n cadrul unei discuii generale, alteori n conversaii mai particulare ntre 2 sau 3 din persoanele prezente. Dl. Duca a spus c la ntlnirea noastr de dup-mas omisese s ne spun un lucru, anume despre chestiunea colaborrii politice a minoritilor. Este adevrat c minoritatea ungar are o reprezentare parlamentar mult mai mic dect aceea la care ar fi ndreptit n concordan cu poziia ei numeric, dar a subliniat puternic c acest fapt nu este din vina Guvernului romn, ci din vina ungurilor nii. Ei nu au vrut s colaboreze i nu i-au desemnat candidai n alegeri. I-am spus c citisem n plngerile maghiare c autoritile romne ar fi creat dificulti n acceptarea candidailor unguri. Dl. Duca a spus c aceasta este cu siguran o plngere nejustificat, deoarece, dimpotriv, Guvernul romn fcuse tot posibilul pentru a obine mcar civa puini alei din partea ungurilor. Este dorina sincer a Guvernului romn ca toate minoritile s fie corect reprezentate n Parlament. Dup-mas, cnd m-am ntors de la diversele noastre convorbiri, am gsit o not de la dl. Etienne de Ugron, fost ministru plenipoteniar ungur, n care spunea c auzind despre prezena noastr la Bucureti i n calitatea lui de preedinte al Partidului maghiar n Romnia se pune la dispoziia mea, dac eu doresc s fiu pus n legtur cu membrii minoritii ungare. El m-a rugat s-i trimit rspunsul eventual la camera ministrului spaniol, care locuia n hotelul n care stteam noi. Acum eu i-am spus dl. Duca despre cererea dl. Ugron, i l-am ntrebat ce fel de om este. Dl. Duca mi-a rspuns c aparine aceluiai tip de om ca i contele Bethlen i contele Bnffy foti mari moieri n Transilvania i destul de intransigeni n vederile lor. Dac doream s-l vd, dl. Duca nu avea nici o obiecie. I-am spus c nu aveam nici cea mai mic dorin personal de a-l vedea, dar dac dl. Duca este de acord, l-a primi n dimineaa urmtoare, mulumindu-i pentru oferta lui amical de a m pune n legtur cu minoritatea maghiar, dar spunndu-i c acest lucru este superfluu ntruct dl. Duca nsui a aranjat tot ceea ce trebuie fcut. Dl. Duca a fost de acord. Dl. Duca mi-a spus c aranjase s lum prnzul la Rege n timpul ederii noastre la Sinaia. I-am mulumit foarte mult pentru tot ceea ce fcuse pentru a ne asigura o vizit att de agreabil i am spus c sper c i treaba pe care o voi face aici se va dovedi util Romniei. Dl. Duca a spus c, aa cum sugerasem n cursul ntrevederii de dup-mas, delegaia ar putea de la Arad, fie s se ntoarc la Bucureti, fie s mearg la Geneva, i cum spusesem, c poate el va dori ca eu s revin chiar dac ceilali vor merge acas, el va aranja s fie la Bucureti pentru o zi cnd eu m voi ntoarce. A fost total de acord c ceilali pot merge de la Arad la Geneva. Dl. Duca a mai spus c preparativele materiale ale cltoriei noastre de la Bucureti la Sinaia i mai departe fuseser fcute, lucru pentru care i-am exprimat din nou mulumirile mele.

Incidental ar trebui s menionez impresia pe care am avut-o c informaia asupra vederilor mele i ale celorlali membri ai Secretariatului este raportat imediat ministrului de Externe i c el vdete un mare interes n tot ceea ce are legtur cu noi. Tot n timpul dineului, el a insistat asupra marii sale satisfacii c am sosit i asupra dorinei lui ca legtura dintre Guvernul romn i Secretariat s fie n sfrit stabilit. E. C. 26 / 7 / 23 * ** n dimineaa aceasta (26 iulie), dl. Ugron a venit s m vad12, i, n concordan cu ceea ce stabilisem cu dl. Duca n seara anterioar, i-am spus c dei i sunt foarte recunosctor pentru propunerea lui amabil de a m prezenta minoritii ungare, consider c nu este nevoie de acest lucru, ntruct dl. Duca stabilise deja pentru mine toate aranjamentele necesare pentru a vedea toate persoanele pe care doresc s le ntlnesc de data aceasta. Am adugat c a vrea s folosesc ocazia de a corecta uoara nenelegere de ieri la primirea notei sale, anume c a fi preedintele unei delegaii trimise de Liga Naiunilor pentru a face o anchet asupra problemei minoritilor. De fapt, nu exist nici o delegaie i nu se face nici o enqute, dac nu cumva dorim s utilizm acest cuvnt pentru a desemna munca de examinare personal a condiiilor din Romnia, pe care eu i colegii mei o ntreprindem acum. El a rspuns c n mod cert a neles greit situaia, dar c nu mai puin dorete s se pun la dispoziia noastr pentru cazul n care am avea nevoie. A adugat, i aceasta cu mult emfaz, c eu pot s-i spun dl. Duca despre demersul su, deoarece nu vrea s fac nimic n afara cunotinei Guvernului romn. Ar dori de asemenea s sublinieze c el i prietenii su din Transilvania nu au nici o alt intenie dect aceea de a fi ceteni loiali ai statului romn. Ei nu ar putea uita ara creia i aparinuser nainte, i ar fi nedemn dac ar uita-o, dar eu pot s fiu sigur c ei accept condiiile prezente ca pe un fapt indiscutabil, i vor face totul ca s se comporte ca ceteni romni loiali; doar att c ei trebuie s solicite respect fa de tradiiile maghiare, limb, religie i coli. Ct despre bunstarea lor material, anumite msuri guvernamentale interferaser puternic cu aceasta, dar acum nu va intra n aceste amnunte, devreme ce spusese deja ceea ce era cel mai important. I-am mulumit foarte mult pentru amabilitatea lui, i ca replic la aceasta, i-am spus c probabil vom merge la Cluj, dar c nc nu cunosc data cnd vom ajunge acolo. El a spus c dac ar putea s-o afle cu puin mai devreme, ar fi foarte bucuros s vin acolo n ora ca s ne asiste. Locuiete undeva n mprejurimi. Am luat prnzul cu dl. Iancovici la casa acestuia. n afar de membrii Secretariatului au fost de fa dl. Goga i dl. Gongopol13, redactorul-ef al ziarului ndreptarea. Am purtat o lung discuie cu dl. Goga (fostul ministru al Cultelor Publice), originar din Transilvania. A prut foarte plcut surprins de remarcile mele generale, ca i de politica Ligii n problemele minoritilor, i i-a exprimat sperana de a ne revedea la Cluj, unde va ajunge n cteva zile. I-am spus c i voi consulta pe membrii Ministerului de Externe care vor merge cu noi, ca s aranjm pe ct posibil s ne ntlnim acolo. El aparine partidului opoziiei i este considerat a fi un candidat sigur la postul de ministru de Externe, atunci cnd va expira mandatul actualului minister. Apropo, i dl. Iancovici aparine aceluiai partid al opoziiei, dar n mod evident a colaborat foarte intim cu dl. Duca cu privire la aranjamentele pentru

primirea noastr aici. Cred c lui i se datoreaz n mare parte primirea excesiv de bun care ni s-a fcut. La ora 2 p. m. am prsit Bucuretiul n direcia Sinaia, nsoii de domnii Lecca i Dianu. Presupun c cei doi directori de la Ministerul Cultelor Publice i Instruciunii Publice ni se vor altura la Sinaia. Toate notele noastre obinuite de hotel au fost pltite de Guvernul romn. I-am mulumit personal dl. Duca, i bineneles nu voi uita i la ntoarcerea la Bucureti s exprim gratitudinea Secretariatului pentru marea atenie acordat nou de ctre Guvernul Romniei. Ct despre reprezentana Romniei n staff-ul Secretariatului, am considerat c nu este potrivit s aduc acum n dezbatere aceast chestiune, mai ales c urmeaz s revin mai trziu singur. O atare chestiune se poate mult mai uor trata ntre patru ochi, i pn acum am avut foarte puine ocazii sau chiar deloc pentru o scurt conversaie privat cu cineva. Am ajuns la Sinaia dup-mas i am trecut la scurt timp dup aceea pe la Palais Royal, pentru a ne nota numele acolo. Nici o alt ntlnire oficial nu a avut loc n cursul dup-mesei. Am cinat la hotel cu dl. Arion ca i gazd, i cu domnii Lecca i Dianu. Nu a fost nici o discuie de interes particular. E. C. 26 / 7 / 23 * ** Pe 27 iulie am fcut o excursie cu automobilul pn la cmpurile petrolifere de pe valea care duce de la Bucureti la Sinaia. Dl. Lecca a venit cu noi. Chiar nainte de prnz el mi-a fcut cunotin cu un brbat care vizita cmpurile petrolifere i care este ministrul romn pentru afacerile Bucovinei. Cu acesta am purtat o conversaie lung i foarte interesant n timpul prnzului. Mi-a spus c n cabinet sunt minitri special pentru afacerile Bucovinei, ale Transilvaniei i ale Banatului. El nsui este de obrie bucovinean. Populaia Bucovinei este cu ceva mai mare de un milion. Dintre acetia aproximativ 10. 000 sunt maghiari. Minoritarii maghiari sunt ceteni buni, absolut loiali i el prea foarte mulumit de atitudinea lor. Nu exist iredentism. Aceti maghiari bucovineni nu au fost niciodat n contact cu maghiarii din Transilvania. Alt minoritate care pare de asemenea s se simt bine n Bucovina o reprezint germanii. Aceste minoriti au avut de dinainte acces la instrucia primar n limbile lor, iar acum instrucia public este destul de bine dezvoltat n ar, ns ca rezultat al condiiilor anterioare doar circa 60% din populaie tie s citeasc i s scrie. n anii ce vor veni, cnd copiii vor crete, situaia va arta firete cu totul altfel. Problemele bisericeti nu ridic dificulti reale n Bucovina. Exist disponibile suficiente fonduri pentru nevoile bisericii. Populaia evreiasc, n numr destul de considerabil, respectiv n jur de o eptime din total, deine monopolul vieii comerciale. O anumit parte a populaiei este de ras rutean, i unii dintre ei au dorit ca ara s fie ncorporat ntr-o Ucrain mai mare, dar n general rutenii bucovineni sunt mulumii cu situaia lor actual. n ceea ce privete condiiile economice din Bucovina, ara a suferit considerabil n timpul rzboiului, fiind ocupat succesiv de diferite armate. S-a depus un efort serios pentru a se ndrepta lucrurile, iar nfiarea actual este foarte bun. Principala ocupaie a locuitorilor este agricultura i industria lemnului. ncorporarea la Romnia Mare a adus Bucovinei

avantaje economice considerabile, pentru c dei avea o agricultur bine dezvoltat nu era apt s-i asigure singur necesarul de hran i trebuia s importe anual o mare cantitate de cereale. Acestea le poate acum obine din Basarabia fr a ntmpina obstacole prin diferenele valutare sau formalitile vamale. Pe de alt parte, principalul articol de export al Bucovinei produsele de silvicultur este cerut n Basarabia. Aceast ar este dens populat, pe drept cuvnt mai dens dect oricare alt parte a actualului stat romn, dar numai circa o ptrime este cultivat. Alt ptrime este acoperit cu pduri. Industria petrolului nc nu exist n ar, dar acum se fac foraje pentru a vedea dac exist petrol i dac poate fi exploatat. Reforma agrar a fost nfptuit n Bucovina ca peste tot n Romnia, ns aici au existat foarte puine latifundii. Presa Bucovinei const dintr-un numr de ziare n diferite limbi. Nu se prea citesc ziare n afara oraelor, i nc mai trebuie fcute multe pentru a spori interesul populaiei n a participa la aciuni exterioare sferei imediate de preocupri. n aceeai sear fusese stabilit s cinm la cazino mpreun cu domnii Lecca i Dianu, dar chiar nainte de cin dl. Dianu mi-a spus c dl. Duca, ce sosise de la Bucureti, ne invit s cinm cu el i cu doamna Duca i cu nc civa funcionari ai Ministerului de Externe. Aa am i fcut, iar conversaia a fost i mai liber dect dile trecute, i absolut prieteneasc. Am ezut ntre doamna Duca i dl. Arion, iar doamna Duca a vorbit despre marile suferine ale Romniei n timpul rzboiului i despre marele efort depus pentru a restabili condiii mai bune. La rndul su, dl. Arion mi-a spus despre satisfacia pe care a resimit-o auzindu-mi opiniile despre problemele minoritilor n general. Dl. Hoden mi-a zis i el mai trziu c dl. Arion i exprimase i fa de el marea satisfacie, i c i spusese c ei la Bucureti i imaginaser c Liga Naiunilor ar avea o alt concepie asupra problemei minoritilor dect era cazul aflnd de la mine. Dl. Duca i-a spus dl. Hoden n timpul cinei c dl. Titulescu este de acord s reprezinte Romnia la Adunare. I-am reamintit domnului Duca faptul c venirea sa la Adunare este foarte dorit, i atunci cnd dl. Hoden a spus c nu este necesar s stea ntreaga perioad la Adunare, am zis c m gndeam c poate perioada dintre 10 i 15 sau 18 septembrie ar fi cea mai potrivit, n cazul n care dl. Duca nu i-ar putea permite s acorde atenie personal ntregii perioade de desfurare a Adunrii. Dup cin m-am ntlnit cu dl. conte de Manneville, ministrul francez n Romnia, pe care l ntlnisem anterior la Quai dOrsay acum aproximativ un an. Atunci ncercasem s-l conving de necesitatea ca Guvernul francez s acorde mai mult interes problemei minoritilor din estul i centrul Europei. El auzise de prezena mea la Sinaia i mi-a trimis cartea de vizit. Mi-a reamintit ceea ce i spusesem, la Quai dOrsay, i a zis c aveam dreptate subliniind importana problemei minoritilor. I-am spus c, desigur, el va fi raportat aceste probleme Guvernului su, dar dac mi permite s spun aa, ar fi de dorit ca atunci cnd i ntocmete rapoartele s ia n particular n considerare necesitatea ca delegaia Franei la Consiliu i n Adunare s fie informat asupra acestor chestiuni delicate, aa nct s poat reprezenta Frana cu cea mai deplin nelegere a faptelor i n posesia tuturor faptelor relevante. Dl. de Manneville a prut s aprecieze acest punct de vedere. M-a ntrebat dac la Geneva primim copii ale rapoartelor sale. Dl. Hoden, care era de fa la aceast conversaie, a spus i eu am fost de acord cu el c aceasta desigur nu este necesar. Important este ca proprii reprezentani ai Franei la Lig s fie bine informai, ca s poat avea cea mai eficient colaborare cu ceilali membri ai Ligii.

Tot dup cin am avut o conversaie cu dl. Filodor, secretarul-general al Ministerului de Externe. A fost foarte prietenos i cred c a primit n fiecare zi rapoarte asupra a ceea ce spuseser membrii Secretariatului de-a lungul ultimelor zile. A spus c eu cu siguran trebuie s vd i s aud tot ce este posibil de vzut i de auzit n timpul celor cteva zile pe care le am la dispoziie. A menionat problema basarabean, i s-a alturat dorinei exprimate de ministrul de Externe ca eu s merg acolo ct de curnd posibil. E. C. 28 / 7 / 23 * ** n aceast diminea (28 iulie), dl. Hoden a fost s se ntlneasc cu dl. Jouvenel, care l-a informat c fusese rugat s fie supleant al dl. Bourgeois ca delegat francez la adunare, i c el acceptase acest lucru. Noi ceilali am fcut o plimbare pe dealuri, i la ntoarcere am fost s-i sun pe domnii Benes i Nintchitch. M-am ntlnit cu domnii Duca i Benes care veneau ntr-o main care tocmai intra la Villa Dacia. Am intrat i am ntrebat dac a putea s-mi las cartea de vizit pentru domnii Benes i Nintchitch. Atunci dl. Duca a ieit i a spus c dl. Benes cu certitudine dorete s m salute, dar ntruct era deja 12 fr 5 minute, iar dl. Benes trebuia s fie la Palais Royal la 12, nu avea timp la dispoziie. Dl. Benes a venit i, ca de obicei, a fost extrem de cordial. A spus c vor face treab bun la Sinaia. n timpul celor cteva minute n care l-am ateptat s apar, dl. Duca a repetat i a subliniat nc o dat plcerea de a m vedea n Romnia, i sperana c tot ceea ce poate face Guvernul romn pentru a-mi uura munca va fi ntreprins. M-a rugat s-mi menin opinia deja exprimat c trebuie examinate condiiile din Romnia n lumina condiiilor existente imediat dup rzboi, i c poate nu este nedrept chiar s cer s fie reamintit c Romnia se aflase ntr-o dezvoltare rapid i n perioada premergtoare rzboiului i c fcuse mari eforturi pentru a se conforma cerinelor timpurilor moderne. Dl. Benes s-a desprit cu au revoir Genve, iar dl. Duca mi-a urat bun-venit n Bucureti la ncheierea cltoriei noastre n provinciile vestice. Am lsat cartea de vizit pentru dl. Nintchitch. Nu am mai putut s ntreb de el, deoarece era deja trziu i era timpul s m mbrac pentru prnzul de la Palais Royal. La prnzul de la Palais Royal au luat parte dl. Constantinescu, ministrul Agriculturii, un vechi politician romn, despre care se spune c ar fi mai degrab de tip reacionar, un jurnalist american i secretarul / secretara (?) lui, membrii Secretariatului (inclusiv domnioara Harris, dei numele ei nu fusese trecut n cartea Reginei), dl. Miu, ministrul Curii i fost ministru al Romniei la Londra, pe care l tiam ca foarte intim prieten al familiei ministrului norvegian de acolo, o doamn de la Curte (domnioara Cantemir), doctorul Curii, un ofier de la Curte, i domnii Lecca i Dianu. Dl. Constantinescu a ezut n dreapta Reginei, eu nsumi n stnga ei, iar domnioara Harris n dreapta Regelui. nainte de a intra n salon, i-am ntlnit n hol pe Rege i pe Regin. Mai nti a venit Regina singur, a dat mna cu toat lumea i a disprut. S-a ntors cinci minute mai trziu, i fr a se adresa cuiva n particular a nceput conversaia astfel: Dl. Colban, neleg c o cunoatei pe fiica mea. Eram bucuros s o ascult cu atenie i am auzit ce a spus, evitnd astfel o situaie care ar fi putut fi destul de jenant. Ea a vorbit cteva minute despre Grecia i refugiaii greci, despre opera lui Nansen i alte subiecte similare. Apoi a fost ntrerupt de

jurnalistul american, lucru pe care acesta l-a fcut ntruna att n timpul prnzului ct i dup aceea, cu toate c era un btrnel foarte simpatic, dei cu un dram de neobrzare. n mod evident mediul l depea. A intrat Regele, care strngnd minile tuturor a condus intrarea n salon. n timpul prnzului, Regina a nceput imediat s povesteasc cu Regele i cu mine teme de familie, lund drept point de dpart cunotina pe care o fcusem cu fiica ei Elisabeta, i vorbind ct se poate de franc despre ceea ce au spus oamenii atunci cnd dou dintre fiicele ei deveniser regine, acuznd-o de ambiie i ncercnd s o transforme n capul unei dinastii cu ramificaii internaionale. A mers att de departe, nct a adus pe tapet chestiunea fiicei ei celei mai mici Ileana, de 14 ani, despre care se spune c ar fi menit a deveni viitoarea regin a Bulgariei. Ea a zis c deocamdat nu se poate mpca cu ideea ca fiica ei s plece n Bulgaria. Bulgaria fusese atta vreme inamica Romniei. Pe de alt parte, auzise multe lucruri bune despre Regele Boris. Ct despre fiica ei, faptul c oamenii vorbeau despre posibila ei cstorie cu regele Boris avusese desigur exact efectul de a o face reticent la o asemenea propunere. I-am sugerat c ar putea fi convenabil statutul de viitoare regin a Norvegiei. Regina vorbea despre aceste lucruri nu la modul glume, ci foarte serios, i a fcut scurte caracterizri ale fiicelor ei, ca i ale soilor a dou dintre ele, regii Greciei i ai Serbiei. A spus c sper c a fost n stare s-i educe fetele cu simul sever al datoriei i c din munca ei ar putea iei ceva bun n noile lor ri. Prea s fie foarte mndr de fiica ei Elisabeta, care avea dificila poziie de regin a Greciei. n ceea ce o privea pe cealalt fiic, regina Serbiei, ea era puin copleit de admiraie i respect fa de soul ei, regele Alexandru, care n ochii soacrei lui apare ca un brbat foarte capabil cu un caracter puternic. Ea i spusese fiicei ei c trebuie s in seama de faptul c s-a cstorit cu un brbat care nc mai este burlac. Pe de alt parte, Regina era de prere c n curnd va interveni o schimbare, ntruct este pe drum un copil. Cred c aceast conversaie, purtat haute voix i urmrit cu considerabil atenie i fr cea mai mic plcere de toat lumea de la mas, a durat cam o or. Apoi Regina a continuat s vorbeasc despre variile ei activiti n timpul i n perioada urmtoare rzboiului de dup rzboi munca de Cruce Roie, opera literar, mai precis poezii pentru copii, basme etc.; de asemenea despre preocuprile ei legate de clrie, grdinrit, case, i despre educaia copiilor ei. A creionat cteva tablouri vii ale vieii de familie n familia regal. Unul dintre ele, care mi se adresa mie, este acela n care a explicat cum, atunci cnd schiele ei scrise n englez (s-a nscut n Kent i vorbete mai bine englezete dect romnete) au fost traduse n familie, soul i copiii ei au ajutat-o s gseasc expresiile romneti corecte corespunztoare celor englezeti. n timp ce Regina a conversat n felul acesta, Regele a vorbit din cnd n cnd pe diferite subiecte cu domnioara Harris, (cnd am auzit o discuie despre minoriti am intervenit, i atunci Regina ne-a tiat-o), dar n general el asculta cu un zmbet amabil ceea ce spunea soia lui. Probabil c nu sunt un foarte bun judector al unor situaii de genul acesta, dar am senzaia c ei formeaz o familie extrem de fericit, i notez asta din cauza ridicolelor zvonuri contrare pe care le poi auzi. Dei are n jur de 45 de ani, Regina nu este numai o femeie plcut, cuceritoare i, mi permit s spun, extrem de inteligent, aa cum rezult i din cele spuse pn aici, dar cu siguran ea este i o mare comoar pentru ara ei. Eu nu pot s judec ce a fcut ea pentru a menine treaz spiritul de rezisten i sperana n timpuri mai bune, dar acum are n mod cert un sim ascuit a ceea ce poate face pentru a consolida regatul prin activitile ei personale n mijlocul oamenilor, i o face. ntotdeauna poart un costum naional romnesc, i l poart cu

graie i ceea ce nu este mereu uor fr a da senzaia c joac un rol, ceea ce ar diminua buna impresie. Regele, la cei 55 de ani ai si, mi-a fcut impresia unui brbat care muncete din greu, cu un puternic sentiment al datoriei, pe deplin la curent cu activitatea Guvernului i mereu la dispoziia minitrilor si pentru a ndeplini acea munc reprezentativ care este de folos rii sale. Dup prnz, Regele i cu mine am purtat o convorbire destul de lung despre scopul vizitei mele n Romnia. Era extrem de bine informat i chiar mi-a oferit date statistice n diferite probleme privind protecia minoritilor de exemplu, mi-a dat cifre referitoare la proporia proprietilor moiereti expropriate i distribuite ranilor de ras romn, n comparaie cu proprietile distribuite ranilor de ras maghiar. A utilizat aproape literal aceeai expresie folosit de dl. Duca i ali membri ai Cabinetului, anume c vrea ca eu s aflu adevrul. Romnia nu are nimic de ascuns i el era sigur c atunci cnd voi fi studiat temeinic condiiile mi voi da seama c politica Romniei este una de dreptate i liberalism. Tnra prines Ileana a aprut i ea i a dat mna cu toat lumea. Este o tnr drgu, poate nu tocmai frumoas, dar proaspt i aparent puternic. Regina mi-a spus (aa cum auzisem deja de la dl. Duca) c prinul motenitor ne va primi n aceeai zi la Braov (Kronstadt), unde prezideaz o competiie naional sportiv, la care particip sportivi din toate prile Romniei Mari, aparinnd diferitelor naionaliti. Regina i-a exprimat sperana c acea competiie prieteneasc a diferitelor naionaliti m va interesa. I-am rspuns c m intereseaz desigur. n legtur cu aceasta, a putea aduga c n timpul conversaiei mele cu Regele subliniasem ideea ajutorului pe care l-ar putea acorda familia regal n soluionarea problemei minoritilor. Aflndu-se n afara partidelor i reprezentnd n mod neutru toate elementele statului, membrii familiei regale erau chemai s formeze puntea de legtur ntre aceste elemente. El a fost perfect de acord cu mine i m-a informat c familia regal a fost foarte nerbdtoare s cunoasc toate prile Romniei Mari, s cunoasc i s intre n legtur cu oamenii de peste tot. Eu nsumi voi avea n aceeai dup-mas ocazia s vd acest lucru n ceea ce-l privete pe prinul motenitor. Am auzit-o i pe Regin discutnd cu dl. Constantinescu despre aprovizionarea ei cu anumite modele de costume naionale, pe care urmeaz s le poarte cnd i va vizita pe secui. Dup retragerea familiei regale am purtat o discuie cu dl. Constantinescu. n chip evident era foarte bine informat asupra misiunii noastre n Romnia, i i-a exprimat nc o dat dorina ca eu s vd tot posibilul, s aud tot ce se poate i s plec cu o nelegere complet a condiiilor. A fost foarte curtenitor i destul de prietenos. A spus c el a fost instigatorul reformei agrare. A mai spus c aceast reform se aplic n toate privinele n mod egal n cazul romnilor i al ungurilor, iar statisticile arat c ranii romni nu primesc proporional mai mult teren expropriat dect primesc cei maghiari. Nu se face nici o discriminare pentru a-i dezavantaja pe unguri. El nsui supravegheaz ndeaproape aceast problem. S-au dat instruciuni ca mie s-mi fie puse la dispoziie toate tipurile de statistici i informaii detaliate. Dup prnz am pornit cu maina spre nord ctre Braov (Kronstadt), unde am asistat la competiia sportiv. Am fost ntmpinai la intrare de ctre prefectul judeului, care n cteva cuvinte n german ne-a urat bun-venit ca reprezentani ai Ligii Naiunilor. Ne-a condus la prinul motenitor, care a fost foarte prietenos i a spus c el dorea ca noi s venim, gndindu-se c poate a fi interesat s vd aceast competiie amical ntre ceteni romni de toate rasele i din toate prile rii. A urmrit mpreun cu mine lista asociaiilor sportive, ca i cteva nume de concureni.

Dup cum am putut auzi cu urechile mele, vorbete la fel de bine i fr efort aparent germana, franceza i engleza. L-am auzit adresndu-se sportivilor, dintre care unii preau s fie soldai, n multe cazuri n german. L-am auzit vorbind franuzete cu ali romni, poate tot la fel de des cum le vorbete n propria lui limb. Despre prinul motenitor, care este chiar preedintele Asociaiei Sporturilor din Romnia (al crei vicepreedinte este un evreu), se spune c are o mare uurin n a intra n contact cu oricine, i eu cred c sunt adevrate rapoartele care atest c este extrem de popular peste tot n ar, unde ntreprinde constant vizite. Dup competiie am fost s cinm cu prefectul i ali doi domni din Braov. Au fost de asemenea prezeni dl. Ionescu i dl. Pteancu, cei doi experi n probleme bisericeti i colare menionai mai sus. Prefectul mi-a spus c Braovul are n jur de 60. 000 de locuitori, din care cam o treime sunt romni, o treime sai (germani) i o treime unguri. El preluase conducerea prefecturii n urm cu aproximativ 8 luni, dup ce predecesorul su nu avusese prea mult noroc n a face diferitele pri ale populaiei s convieuiasc bine mpreun. El nsui cugeta c ajunsese la rezultate bune n acest sens. Problemele colare i bisericeti rezultnd din chestiunea minoritilor nu au iscat dificulti reale. n ora exist 3 ziare cotidiane: unul romnesc, unul german i unul maghiar. Ultimul, din care am cumprat un numr, avea un format destul de mare, i prefectul mi-a spus c se vinde ntr-un tiraj de 18.000 de exemplare pe zi. A zis c este destul de ostil, i ca exemplu a menionat faptul c niciodat nu scap prilejul de a raporta dificultile prin care trece Frana. Prefectul mi-a spus c acum vreo dou sptmni a primit transferul la Oradea Mare, unde urmeaz s-i preia sarcinile n urmtoarele cteva zile, aa c este posibil s ne ntlnim i acolo. n aceeai zi n ora s-a srbtorit un banchet n cinstea prinului motenitor, iar prinul a avut o cuvntare foarte reuit, felicitndu-l pe prefect pentru rezultatele muncii sale n Braov i exprimndu-i sperana c succesorul lui va urma aceeai linie n administraie ca i el. Prinul s-a exprimat i asupra problemei minoritilor, ntr-un mod care a provocat satisfacie general. Prefectul a promis s-mi trimit un numr de ziar care va face o dare de seam asupra banchetului. Despre noua lui prefectur mi-a spus c va avea sub administraia sa 400. 000 de persoane, dintre care cam 300. 000 de unguri. Sarcina ce-i sttea n fa era dificil, dar era sigur c va putea face treab bun. A spus c este important n primul rnd s te ocupi de administraie, i nu de legislaie. Chiar i cele mai bune legi pot fi administrate prost, n timp ce legi de valoare ndoielnic pot fi administrate ntr-un mod care s mulumeasc interesele populaiei. Opinia lui proprie despre problema minoritilor a rezumat-o astfel: minoritilor trebuie s li se acorde libertatea de a-i pstra specificitile culturale, i n special bisericile i colile, dar ele trebuie s fie i naionalizate ntr-o asemenea msur nct s devin loiale noului lor stat i s se considere drept parte integrant a statului. Maghiarii i saii, dei pstrndu-i cultul lor naional aparte, trebuie s simt c sunt cu toii egali ca ceteni romni. Printre evenimentele acestei zile, ar trebui s amintesc i faptul c dl. Hoden mi-a spus c a auzit de la dl. Jouvenel, care l vzuse recent pe dl. Brtianu, c acesta din urm nc i menine atitudinea intransigent fa de Liga Naiunilor i munca ei n problemele minoritilor. Totui dl. Brtianu i-a dat dl. Duca mn liber pentru aciunile prezente. E. C. 28 / 7 / 23

* ** Am prsit Braovul n cursul nopii de 28 iulie, n conformitate cu programul nostru, ndreptndu-ne spre Gheorghieni, unde urmeaz s vizitm anumite sate din mprejurimi i s ajungem seara la Miercurea Ciuc. n tren am avut prima discuie de o or i un sfert cu dl. Ionescu, director general al bisericilor minoritilor n Ministerul Cultelor Publice de la Bucureti. Dl. Ionescu a lucrat ca ataat al Ministerului pentru probleme colare timp de 14 ani la Budapesta i a studiat n Germania la universitatea din Jena. Am dezbtut mpreun bugetul, el explicndu-mi n detaliu cum sunt pltii preoii i ceilali oficiani ai bisericilor minoritilor, lucru din care decurg numeroase avantaje pentru clerul din Transilvania fa de cel din Vechiul Regat. Mi-a dat o copie a unui extras original dintr-un ziar romnesc, pe care l nmnase Ministrului de Externe, i din care am primit rezumatul n francez. Am discutat cteva din cele mai importante puncte ale articolului, ca s m asigur c nu nelegeam greit mesajul dincolo de valoarea de suprafa a cuvintelor. Apoi am spus c, din cte tie i el, exist un numr de petiii pe probleme ecleziastice, i, cu toate c nu cred c este posibil s intru n toate acum, a dori s ridic una sau dou probleme. Am menionat argumentul c reforma agrar n Transilvania lovete foarte puternic bisericile, lundu-le posesiunile n teren deinute anterior. Dl. Ionescu a zis c chestiunea reformei agrare depete sfera sa de competen, dar c el m poate asigura c prin aplicarea reformei nu biserica este cea care sufer, ci eventual numai anumii demnitari ai bisericii, personal. Toate nevoile legitime ale bisericii sunt asigurate de ctre stat, i atunci cnd Guvernul a expropriat pmntul bisericii, a trebuit evident s-i ia ntreaga responsabilitate pentru finanele bisericii. Am amintit decretul Ministerului romn al Cultelor din 16 noiembrie 1921, cu privire la reorganizarea protopopiatelor bisericilor minoritilor. Dl. Ionescu mi-a explicat c, dac n Romnia protopopiatele acoper n cele mai multe cazuri un mare numr de parohii (mi-a artat o list cu protopopiate care au fiecare ntre 40 i 55 de parohii), n Transilvania multe protopopiate au un numr foarte sczut de parohii, ntr-unul din cazuri numai 2. Biserica Ortodox are cam 13.000.000 suflete la 16.218 preoi i 179 protopopiate, n timp ce bisericile minoritilor au 3.200.000 suflete la 3.572 preoi i 153 protopopiate, toate finanate de ctre Guvern cu 600 lei pe lun pe lng salariile preoilor. De aceea din raiuni bugetare a fost necesar s se stabileasc regula c Guvernul nu va plti pe deintorul funciei de protopop, dac protopopiatul nu are cel puin 20 de parohii, dar aceasta nu nsemna n nici un caz c au fost transferate parohii altor protopopiate sau c Guvernul a intervenit n vreun fel n modalitatea de constituire a protopopiatelor. Dac protopopiatele nsele doreau s-i plteasc singure astfel de funcii n numr mai mare dect cel acceptat de lege, aveau ns toat libertatea s o fac. De asemenea am menionat problema altui decret al Ministerului Cultelor din 16 noiembrie 1921, care stabilea regula c parohiile cu mai puin de 200 de suflete sunt meninute de ctre Guvernul romn numai dup aprobarea lor de ctre Minister. Dl. Ionescu mi-a explicat c regula a fost rstlmcit grosolan. Ea nu implic necesitatea suprimrii nici unui preot, i nici transferarea parohiei la alt preot. Dac membrii parohiei doresc s plteasc un preot care are un numr foarte mic de credincioi, (mi-a artat statistici, pe care mi-a

promis c mi le va trimite n copie, conform crora numrul membrilor parohiei este n multe cazuri sub 100), aceasta este treaba lor, dar statul rspunztor pentru plata salariilor tuturor preoilor nu poate permite bisericilor s menin preoi pe cheltuiala statului, atunci cnd prezena preoilor nu se bazeaz pe o necesitate real. Regula la care ne-am referit nu este o lege grea, nici una de extrem urgen, dar le impune bisericilor datoria de a raporta Ministerului toate locurile vacante de preoi, acolo unde numrul sufletelor din parohie este mai mic de 300, pentru a permite Guvernului s cntreasc dac acoperirea locului vacant este necesar sau nu. Nimic nu poate mpiedica Guvernul, chiar existnd aceast regul, s decid aprobarea preotului, chiar dac de pild numrul sufletelor din parohie este, s zicem, doar de 200 sau de 150, ns dac condiiile locale impun aceast aprobare. Am mai ntrebat dac este adevrat c funcionarii inferiori locali administreaz legile i decretele referitoare la bisericile minoritilor ntr-un mod contrar intereselor minoritilor, i n general manifest o atitudine ostil fa de bisericile minoritilor n aceste chestiuni. Dl. Ionescu a spus c n perioada imediat urmtoare rzboiului ostilitatea dintre unguri i romni n Transilvania a influenat ntr-o oarecare msur atitudinea autoritilor locale romneti. Dar acum situaia este diferit, iar administraia face tot ce poate pentru ca regulile n vigoare s fie aplicate cu mare atenie fa de interesele bisericilor minoritilor. Apoi i-am artat dl. Ionescu faptul c Aliana prezbiterian general din Edinburgh mi scrisese pe tema situaiei bisericilor minoritilor, i l-am ntrebat dac a putea afirma c deplina libertate individual este asigurat oficianilor i membrilor Bisericii Reformate din Transilvania, i c li se acord faciliti rezonabile pentru cltorii de biseric i coal n strintate fr pericol pentru cetenia lor. Dl. Ionescu a subliniat cu emfaz c acesta este cazul. Guvernul a refuzat s recunoasc ns orice subordonare administrativ a bisericilor minoritilor fa de biserici din afara granielor. Biserica Reformat numr pe teritoriu romnesc n jur de 700.000 de suflete, i nu exist nici o necesitate pentru vreo conectare administrativ cu ri strine. Dar, atta timp ct bisericile doresc s corespondeze sau s menin relaii n domeniul dogmelor sau al altor chestiuni strict religioase cu biserici similare din ri strine, ele sunt libere s-o fac. L-am mai ntrebat dac organizaiile din ar ale Bisericii Reformate au voie s funcioneze fr impedimente, i n particular dac Sinodul reformat din Transilvania este liber n mod oficial s comunice pe probleme ecleziastice cu alte biserici reformate din Ungaria sau de altundeva. Dl. Ionescu a rspuns c aceasta este absolut sigur. Cu o ntrziere de cteva ore am ajuns la Gheorghieni, unde am fost ntmpinai la gar de prefect, dl. Sptaru i de urmtorii deputai: dl. Erdlyi (maghiar, fost prefect al districtului), dl. Cristea (romn) i Dr. tefan Bogdan (romn, fost senator, Str. Frumoas 48, Bucureti). Am cltorit cu maina la Suseni, unde am fost primii de o mare mulime de cteva sute de oameni, cu muzic. Subprefectul judeului a inut o cuvntare, parial n ungurete, parial n romnete, la care prefectul i-a rspuns n romnete, iar dl. Erdlyi a tradus n ungurete. Eu desigur nu am neles cuvntrile, dar am avut senzaia c prefectul a fost ovaionat cu mare satisfacie. Apoi un btrn ran ungur a rostit o cuvntare i am mers la masa de prnz, la care au participat n jur de 30 de persoane. Membrii Secretariatului au ocupat locurile oaspeilor. Eu am ezut la dreapta dl. Szcs Gza, directorul liceului din Gheorghieni. Este maghiar. n dreapta mea edea un alt maghiar, care mi-a spus c n timp ce mai mult de 90% din locuitorii municipalitii sunt unguri, cam 80% din cei prezeni sunt de aceeai naionalitate. S-au inut mai multe cuvntri. De fiecare dat cnd se meniona numele prefectului toat lumea aplauda. Protopopul (ungur) a vorbit mult aclamnd delegaia

Secretariatului Ligii Naiunilor. A trebuit s spun n replic cteva cuvinte, mulumindu-i pentru primirea prieteneasc. Toi vorbeau n german. Franceza nu s-a folosit aproape deloc, dei civa dintre cei prezeni o nelegeau. Tema general a diferitelor cuvntri a fost aceea c secuii sunt mndri de ara lor, de colile i limba lor, i de autonomia lor local, asupra meninerii creia au insistat, dar c sunt de asemenea loiali Regelui i Romniei Mari. Dup prnz am mers cu maina la Lazarea, unde am fost ntmpinai de primar i de conductorul colii romano-catolice. Primarul a inut o cuvntare. Prefectul a replicat i a fost tradus n maghiar. Am mers n cldirea colii, care era excesiv de curat i mi-a fcut o impresie foarte bun. Mi s-a tradus orarul uneia dintre clase, din care rezulta c nvmntul se face n limba maghiar i c nu exist nici o urm de romnizare n ceea ce privete limba, pe ct mi-a fost mie posibil s-mi dau seama din acel orar. Urmtoarea noastr oprire a fost la Ditru. Acesta este un fel de sat mai mare, cu o mare catedral romano-catolic, pe care am vizitat-o. Primarul ne-a primit cu o cuvntare, la care a rspuns prefectul. Mi s-a transmis cuvntarea primarului. Am neles c se refer la anumite probleme legate de reforma agrar i n particular de pduri. Am fost s vedem coala primar i coala secundar, dar nu am intrat n aceste cldiri, cci ne-am ntlnit cu unul dintre dascli. Prefectul l-a chestionat despre condiiile colare, i se pare c el ar fi fcut afirmaia c tocmai de curnd Guvernul romn a emis un ordin prin care limba romn va nlocui maghiara n coli. Dl. Pteancu, care era de fa, a obiectat i a spus c vrea s i se arate ordinul, pentru c n mod sigur nu a fost emis nici un astfel de ordin. Apoi a venit directorul colii, un preot romano-catolic, i cred c a explicat c la mijloc fusese o nenelegere. A fost adus orarul colii secundare, i mi-au fost traduse din el n german mai multe coloane, din aceasta rezultnd c limba romn se nva doar pre de cteva puine ore pe sptmn n anumite clase, iar restul nvmntului se desfoar n maghiar. A fost adus i ordinul n discuie, iar dl. Pteancu a explicat c este vorba despre o regul care spune c attea i attea ore de nvmnt trebuie inute n limba romn la diferite clase, i attea i attea ore n limba maghiar, dar desigur limba de desfurare a nvmntului n general este maghiara (cu excepia nvmntului n limba romn). Acest incident a prut s-i impresioneze foarte mult pe romnii care erau cu noi. Ei mi-au spus n fa c nvtorul care fcuse afirmaia eronat ar fi spus o minciun pentru a face propagand. Am rspuns c nu pot crede aa ceva, altfel afirmaia lui ar fi dovedit o prostie prea mare. Dup prerea mea ceea ce se ntmplase a fost o simpl nenelegere, dei poate nu tocmai scuzabil pentru nvtorul care ar fi trebuit s ne dea informaii demne de ncredere. Am luat prnzul la Ditru. Cu noi era prefectul, la fel i preotul, pe care l-am plasat lng mine pentru a putea discuta cu el. L-am ntrebat asupra problemelor colare i bisericeti ale judeului n general. L-am ntrebat i despre salariul su, i fie nu m-a neles exact, fie a intenionat s m induc n eroare, am auzit c-mi spune c primete 12. 000 de lei pe an. Am spus c aceasta este foarte puin, i atunci dl. Ionescu, care edea la cellalt capt al mesei, a intervenit i l-a ntrebat pe preot dac nu cumva greete i dac nu cumva vorbete numai despre salariul su asigurat din contribuiile locale. A urmat o scurt discuie ntre dl. Ionescu i preot, pe care nu am putut-o percepe n detaliu, dar cred c preotul a recunoscut c venitul su total este mult mai mare dect 12. 000 de lei. Mai trziu dl. Ionescu mi-a explicat c acest preot nu informase Guvernul, aa cum ar fi trebuit, c venitul su local crescuse de la 1. 000 de lei, cum fusese fixat n 1898, la 12. 000 de lei. Dl. Ionescu mi-a mrturisit c preotul a fost... Eu, totui nu cred aceasta i sunt de prere c numai dificultile lingvistice ntre preot i mine au condus la aceast afirmaie greit. Trebuie s notez c mai trziu dl. Ionescu mi-a

dat urmtoarea informaie: contribuiile locale la salariile preoilor fuseser fixate n 1898 i ele trebuiau calculate din salariul total atunci cnd statul fcea socoteala ct are de pltit. De la 1898 ncoace n general contribuia local crescuse foarte mult, iar preoii erau obligai s informeze Guvernul asupra acestui spor, pentru a permite Guvernului s calculeze contribuia local din totalul pltit de ctre stat. Totui nimic nu putea mpiedica o anumit comun s verse plusul n contribuia ei sporit i s spun c statul nu trebuie s scad suma corespunztoare. Astfel preoii puteau dobndi un salariu cu mult mai mare dect salariul total, inclusiv bonificaiile pentru nivelul sporit al costurilor etc., stipulate n bugetul statului. Impresia mea general n urma vizitelor ntreprinse n aceast zi a fost aceea c n general prefectul este foarte simpatizat, este primit peste tot cu mult curtoazie, iar cuvntrile lui sunt foarte aplaudate. Ct despre tipul de persoane prezente la diferite ntruniri, n-am putut afla reprezentani ai ceea ce s-ar putea numi clasa intelectual, cu excepia funcionarilor prezeni. Poate c judecata mea este eronat, dar nici mcar primarii diferitelor orele nu m-au convins c aparin altei clase dect celei rneti. ntrunirile au fost de mare anvergur. La Ditru cred c au participat mai mult de 1.000 de persoane. Cuvntrile au fost ascultate cu extrem atenie i au fost ntrerupte de aplauze frecvente. N-am putut observa nici o nemulumire, ceea ce nu exclude desigur posibilitatea ca localnicii cu adevrat nemulumii s se in deoparte. Nu cred c cineva dintre cei prezeni la aceste adunri avea vreo idee ct de ct clar asupra a ceea ce reprezint Liga Naiunilor. Ni s-a menionat ntotdeauna apartenena la diferite naionaliti, i cred c pe noi ne considerau a fi mai degrab o comisie de anchet mputernicit cu puteri depline, dect numai o delegaie a ctorva funcionari ai Secretariatului. n discuii avute cu mai muli delegai prezeni am ncercat s le conturez o concepie mai limpede. Am ntrebat muli oameni din diverse locuri despre situaia lor economic, i am primit rspunsul unanim c dei preurile sunt foarte mari i viaa este tot mai grea, perspectivele imediate sunt foarte bune, n special graie recoltei rodnice ateptate anul acesta. Ct despre preuri, trebuie s menionez c impresia mi-a fost confirmat din sursele autoritilor, i anume c n general costurile de via nu sunt n nici un caz att de ridicate ca n rile europene occidentale, dac se ia n considerare doar valoarea intern a leului: cu alte cuvinte leul are o capacitate de cumprare intern cu mult mai mare dect este indicat n cotaiile de burs. E. C. 29/ 7 / 23 * ** i n noaptea aceea am dormit n trenul spre Gheorghieni, unde am ajuns n dimineaa zilei de 30 iulie. Prefectul ne-a condus ntr-o alt cltorie motorizat sus n muni, ntr-un loc numit Ghilco14. ntreaga cltorie a fost extrem de plcut. Din punct de vedere turistic, ndrznesc s spun c nu am vzut niciodat o zon muntoas mai atrgtoare. Locul este mai deschis dect sunt munii Elveiei n general, dar este la fel de slbatic, iar stncile au dimensiuni impozante. Un singur drum excelent duce de la Gheorghieni spre acest punct. n timpul cltoriei am fost n main mpreun cu prefectul, cu dl. Ionescu i dl. Azcarate. Vznd c trecem printr-o ar att de minunat mpdurit, am profitat de ocazie pentru a-l ntreba pe dl. Ionescu despre condiiile legale ale pdurritului n Transilvania. El s-a

consultat cu prefectul i mi-a dat nite informaii foarte interesante. Cred c dl. Azcarate a luat notie. Am revenit la Gheorghieni la prnz. Ne-am ntlnit cu ministrul pentru afacerile Bucovinei, pe care l-am menionat anterior cnd descriam vizitarea cmpurilor petrolifere. A prut foarte bucuros s ne revad. Primarul oraului Gheorghieni a fost de fa i i-a druit domnioarei Harris nite flori minunate. i dl. Gza, directorul liceului din Gheorghieni, a fost acolo. Dup prnz ne-am urcat n main i am pornit n jos spre Miercurea Ciucului, reedina prefectului, unde s-a dat o alt mas n cinstea noastr. La casa prefectului l-am cunoscut pe unul dintre inspectorii Ministerului Instruciei Publice, cu care am purtat o interesant discuie. Mi-a explicat concepia lui despre problema minoritilor, iar opiniile semnau n general foarte mult cu ale mele, dei desigur el a subliniat mai puternic necesitatea ca minoritile s fie deplin i total loiale statului. La aceast cin, ca i la toate ocaziile n care am luat masa cu el, prefectul s-a aezat alturi de una sau dou persoane din suita sa, nu foarte aproape de noi. Sunt sigur c unicul motiv este acela c vorbete o francez destul de srccioas i foarte puin german. Ca ntotdeauna, i acum s-a purtat extrem de curtenitor i prietenos. Dl. Bogdan, deputat i fost senator, pe care l-am amintit mai devreme, a luat i el parte la cin, i a venit cu noi cnd am pornit spre Tunad, unde am neles c se afl casa lui de var. Dup mas, care s-a ncheiat n jurul orei 5 dup-amiaza, am cobort cu maina n direcia Tunad. La scurt timp dup ce am prsit casa prefectului am ajuns ntr-un loc unde se adunaser cam 60 de persoane, i am fcut un scurt popas. Judectorul local, care am neles c este un secui de limb maghiar, a inut o cuvntare, care mi-a fost tradus n german, urnd delegaiei Secretariului bun-venit i asigurndu-ne de loialitatea populaiei fa de ar. Am primit o copie a cuvntrii, ca i a traducerii de la cei doi domni care au vorbit. Dup o cltorie foarte plcut (toate aceste excursii cu maina au fost cu adevrat minunate), am ajuns la Tunad, o staiune balnear de remarcabil frumusee, aezat ntr-o pdure de pini. Am avut o lung discuie cu dl. Bogdan, n timp ce ne-am plimbat pe strzi i pe poteci. Am ncercat s-i explic pe scurt scopurile Ligii Naiunilor, politica ei general, poziia Secretariatului etc. Am atins i problema minoritilor. A spus c el personal este de prere c ar fi mai nelept ca romnii s nu fac eforturi prea rapide de a convinge naionalitile s uite c anterior au fost cetenii altui stat. n mintea lui corect ar fi o politic ct mai liberal fa de minoriti cu putin, i el a susinut aceast idee n discuiile avute la Guvern (dl. Azcarate mi-a spus c dl. Bogdan l-a informat c este prieten personal cu dl. Brtianu). El credea c Guvernul nu fusese bine inspirat numind prea muli funcionari romni n noile provincii. Pe de alt parte, el simea c Guvernul dorete binele minoritilor n ceea ce privete colile i bisericile. M-a ntrebat dac l-am vzut pe dl. Brtianu, i i-a exprimat sperana c dac nu l-am vzut nc poate voi avea posibilitatea s-l ntlnesc la ntoarcerea mea la Bucureti. Din cte neleg, el nsui aparine Partidului Liberal al dl. Brtianu i am senzaia c ne-a urmrit munca depus n jude cu acelai interes acut ca i prefectul, dar poate cu mai mult nelegere personal. Cnd mi-am permis s-i sugerez c este pcat c n Parlamentul Romniei sunt numai 3 sau 4 deputai maghiari i c situaia ar fi cu totul alta cnd vor fi 20 a spus c este total de acord cu mine i a revenit la scurt timp dup aceasta asupra sugestiei mele, repetndu-i consensul.

Dl. Bogdan a promis s-mi trimit fie la Ministerul de Externe din Bucureti, fie la Geneva o copie a ziarelor din jude care vor face o dare de seam asupra cltoriei noastre aici. Dinspre partea mea i-am promis s-i aranjez trimiterea publicaiilor Ligii care l-ar putea interesa. Promisiuni similare am fcut altor cteva persoane menionate n aceste note. Dl. Hoden va ntocmi o list i un program complet de meninere a legturii cu Romnia, pe care le voi vedea mai nainte de a fi adoptate definitiv. Desigur vom scrie unui numr de persoane imediat dup ntoarcerea noastr la Geneva, pentru a da glas mulumirii noastre pentru amabilitatea lor n timpul ederii noastre aici. Dup un supeu uor, n timpul cruia am continuat s povestesc cu dl. Bogdan, n cele din urm am prsit Tunadul cu puin nainte de miezul nopii. Mi-am exprimat marea recunotin fa de prefect pentru maniera extrem de curtenitoare n care ne fusese de ajutor i felicitrile pentru bunele relaii pe care le-a stabilit cu populaia n cursul celor 10 luni ale mandatului su de prefect. E. C. 30 / 7 / 23 * ** n urmtoarea zi de 31 iulie, ne ateptam s ajungem la Sibiu la ora 9 dimineaa, dar ca rezultat al unui incident n rezolvarea atarii unor maini speciale pentru noi la trenul n cauz, am ajuns numai la 2. 30 dup-mas. Am profitat de dimineaa pe care o aveam astfel la dispoziie ca s discut cu dl. Ionescu i dl. Pteancu diferite chestiuni bisericeti i colare. Mai nti am discutat cu dl. Ionescu singur anumite probleme ale bisericii, numai pentru a-mi clarifica diferite puncte ale discuiilor anterioare. Apoi a venit dl. Pteancu, de asemenea dl. Hoden i dl. Azcarate, i am dezbtut mpreun situaia general a colilor minoritilor. Dl. Hoden i dl. Azcarate au luat foarte ateni notie n cursul discuiei, i am czut de acord s le compare ntre ei i s-mi nainteze o lucrare pe ct posibil detaliat asupra discuiei, la ntoarcerea mea la Geneva. n gara din Sibiu am fost ntmpinai de prefect, dl. Boiu, i de primar, dl. Goritz. Am fost condui la hotel, unde am servit prnzul. n main, pe drum spre hotel, le-am pus prefectului i primarului unele ntrebri introductive, i am aflat c prefectul s-a nscut n Sibiu i a absolvit gimnaziul evanghelic din localitate. Prin urmare vorbete o excelent german. Are 50 de ani, este cstorit cu o doamn englezoaic, al crei tat este un german care locuiete n Anglia. Dac mi amintesc bine, este prefect de un an i un pic. Primarul este puin mai n vrst i este de snge pur ssesc. Conversaiile noastre n timpul ederii la Sibiu s-au purtat aproape exclusiv n german. Prefectul i primarul mi-au spus c Sibiul are un numr de aproximativ 32. 000 locuitori, mai precis c acest numr se pstreaz neschimbat de dinaintea rzboiului. Aceasta se explic prin faptul c circa 4. 000 de militari aflai n garnizoan au fost retrai, aproximativ 2. 000 de unguri au prsit oraul, i un numr corespondent sau cu ceva mai mare de romni au venit n ora. Starea prezent atest c din cei 32. 000 de oameni marea majoritate o reprezint saii, exist 7. 000 sau 8. 000 de romni, iar 2. 000 sunt de ras ungar. Oraul are numai civa evrei. Dintre maghiarii care au plecat cei mai muli erau funcionari sau mici comerciani, al cror trai aici fusese condiionat de prezena trupelor i autoritilor maghiare.

Dup prnz am fcut o rund de vizite, i mai nti l-am vizitat pe dl. Teutsch15, episcopul Bisericii Evanghelice. Prefectul i primarul au venit cu noi. Au fost prezeni dl. Ionescu i dl. Pteancu, nu i dl. Lecca, dl. Dianu i domnioara Harris. Dl. Teutsch este un domn vrstnic de poate puin peste 60 de ani, de tip foarte german. Prefectul a nceput conversaia spunnd c am venit s ascultm ce ne poate el spune despre situaia bisericii sale de pn acum i care poate s intereseze Liga Naiunilor. Dl. Teutsch a rspuns c este gata s-mi rspund la ntrebri. I-am zis c deocamdat nu am anumite ntrebri particulare, dar a fi foarte bucuros s ne cunoatem i mi-ar plcea s aud ceea ce dorete el s ne spun despre condiiile n care se afl biserica lui, pentru a ne permite s nelegem ct mai bine posibil problemele bisericii din Transilvania. Dl. Teutsch a spus c este destul de greu s fac asta ntr-o vizit aa de scurt cum este a noastr, dar se pune la dispoziia noastr pentru orice fel de informaii. A continuat apoi amintind anumite chestiuni particulare, i mai ales situaia financiar a bisericii, care a spus c provoac o mare nelinite. Cu toate acestea, el nutrete sperana ferm c Guvernul va trata Biserica Evanghelic ntr-o manier care s mulumeasc cererile ei legitime. A menionat c se afl n pregtire o nou lege a bisericii i una a colii, i ca rspuns la ntrebarea mea, a afirmat c proiectul de lege a bisericii i-a fost trimis spre consultare, iar el i-a exprimat opinia, i sper c Guvernul i-o va lua n considerare n cea mai favorabil lumin. Aceast lege va consacra i chestiunea financiar. Ct despre relaiile sale cu dl. Ionescu, acestea au fost ntotdeauna excelente. Dl. Ionescu a spus c proiectul de lege a bisericii va fi reconsiderat n lumina replicilor primite de la diferite biserici, i va fi iari remis acestora pentru observaii mai nainte de a fi supus Parlamentului. Episcopul a menionat cererea Guvernului ca bieii de coal, inclusiv cei de la gimnaziu, nu trebuie s poarte numai apc, lucru cu care fuseser de acord i biserica, dar c trebuie s poarte i uniform. Episcopul a spus c Biserica se opune acestei cereri din toate puterile. Bieii de gimnaziu obiecteaz serios la uniform, care va avea i un numr. Prefectul i dl. Pteancu au explicat c purtarea uniformei este decretat pentru toate colile din ar i nu numai pentru colile minoritilor, i este gndit ca fiind pe durat lung economic pentru prini i avantajoas pentru biei. Cu toate acestea, episcopul a insistat asupra punctului su de vedere. Apoi episcopul a menionat decretul emis recent de Universitatea din Cluj, conform cruia de-acum nainte studenii urmeaz s fie admii la diferitele faculti numai dup trecerea unui test special. Aceasta nseamn c diplomele pe care studenii le primesc de la gimnaziu nu mai sunt considerate suficiente pentru admiterea la Universitate i episcopului i se prea nerezonabil ca Universitatea s aib puterea de a micora n felul acesta valoarea diplomelor, mai ales c acel comitet ce va corecta testul special va fi compus din romni. Dl. Pteancu i dl. Ionescu au explicat c decretul a fost emis nu de Guvern, ci de Universitate n virtutea dreptului ei de autonomie i pare s se bazeze pe consideraia c prea muli tineri doresc s fie admii la Universitate. De aceea este necesar s se verifice acest lucru n vreun fel, i cea mai bun i mai imparial modalitate pare a fi instituirea unui test special, care s dovedeasc de la caz la caz c studentul este apt pentru studiile pe care vrea s le urmeze n particular. Apoi episcopul a vorbit despre consecinele reformei agrare, care privase bisericile i colile de mare parte din proprieti i le cauzase foarte mari dificulti. Rspunsul romnilor prezeni a fost cel obinuit, c reforma agrar a lovit la fel de mult Vechiul Regat ca i Transilvania, i c statul va lua n considerare situaia bisericii i va plti acolo unde biserica nu poate s o fac. n fiecare caz n parte, a spus dl. Ionescu, contribuia ctre biseric a fost

fixat innd cont de numrul de credincioi ai acelei biserici i de situaia financiar a bisericii. L-am ntrebat dac aceasta nu nseamn c ar trebui s se treac la ndemnuri de a face fundaii i dotaii, iar dl. Ionescu a spus foarte limpede c situaia financiar a fiecrei biserici va fi luat n calcul la fixarea contribuiei statului. Spre surprinderea mea, episcopul a spus c aceasta este o soluie just. De la dl. Teutsch am fost la mitropolitul Bisericii Ortodoxe, dl. Blan16, care ne-a primit cu ceva mai mult cordialitate dect episcopul. Ne-a asigurat c este bucuros s vad n casa sa delegaia Ligii i ne-a invitat la el la prnz a doua zi. Urmtoarea vizit a fost la dl. Schullerus17, senator i preot evanghelic al oraului Sibiu. Acolo a avut loc o conversaie destul de interesant, pentru c el i-a exprimat nemulumirea pentru faptul c garaniile minoritilor nu fuseser incluse n noua Constituie, i de aceea minoritile sunt la discreia oricrui Guvern viitor. Cnd am spus c firete Guvernul nu poate modifica Constituia fr acordul Parlamentului, a replicat zmbind c Guvernul n mod cert controleaz Parlamentul. N-am considerat c ar fi nelept s menionez c, desigur, tratatul minoritilor pe care Romnia l promulgase ca lege nu poate fi modificat fr consimmntul Ligii Naiunilor i c din aceast cauz este considerat suficient garania constituional. Dl. Schullerus ne-a lsat s nelegem c membrii actualului Guvern le dduser asigurri verbale cu caracter satisfctor pentru situaia bisericii n viitor. i el vzuse proiectul de lege al bisericii i i adugase propriile observaii. n cele din urm l-am vizitat pe dl. Walbaum18, care aparine, cred, Partidului politic liberal. A fost doar o vizit de curtoazie, fr interes real. i cu aceast ocazie, ca i n cele anterioare, toate vizitele au fost aranjate de ctre autoritile romneti. Nu mi-am exprimat dorina de a vedea alte persoane. n aceeai sear am luat la hotel cina oferit de prefect, la care au participat persoanele pe care le vizitasem n dup-masa aceea i nc alte cteva, inclusiv mai multe doamne. Nu s-au inut cuvntri. Am ezut alturi de doamna Boiu, care a vorbit n termeni elogioi despre familia regal, despre vizitele constante ale acesteia n diferite pri ale rii i despre interesul ei n operele sociale. De cealalt parte a mea edea mitropolitul, care a nceput conversaia explicndu-mi modul de organizare al bisericii sale i felul n care fusese ales i nu numit; Regele avea doar dreptul de a-i confirma numirea, nu de a-i propune Sinodului candidatura. Apoi am vorbit eu despre idealurile Ligii i am sugerat c, ntruct idealurile sunt n esen aceleai, colaborarea cu biserica va fi foarte bun. Am spus c aceasta este prerea mea, pe care n urm cu mai mult timp o expusesem i dl. Bourgeois, iar el a fost de acord. Eu mi-am exprimat sperana sincer c nalii demnitari ai bisericii vor fi interesai de munca Ligii. n noaptea aceea am dormit la Sibiu. E. C. 1/ 8 / 23 * ** n urmtoarea zi, pe 1 august, m-am ntlnit cu primarul i l-am ntrebat care este metoda de alegere a primarilor de la sate i orae. A rspuns c la sate nc acetia mai sunt alei, ct vreme la orae consiliile municipale anterioare fuseser dizolvate i primarul este numit de ctre Guvern.

Apoi am ieit pentru cteva ore s vedem mprejurimile, fcnd o cltorie cu maina prin dou sate sseti i unul romnesc. Peste tot se vedeau semne de bune condiii economice. Aa cum stabilisem n ziua anterioar, am fost s lum prnzul cu mitropolitul, unde au fost prezente aceleai persoane ca i la cina ultimei seri. Am ezut ntre dl. Schullerus i mitropolit, cu episcopul care era plasat vizavi de mitropolit. Conversaia a fost n parte general, dar am avut buna ocazie de a discuta destul de mult cu dl. Schullerus, care s-a dovedit a fi un foarte instruit om german de cultur, foarte interesat de limba norvegian veche, pe care prea s-o cunoasc mai bine dect mine nsumi. Mitropolitul s-a lansat ntr-o lung dizertaie asupra reformei agrare, pe care n chip evident i-o pregtise pentru a-i putea susine vederile. El dduse reformei binecuvntarea sa, pentru c era just din punct de vedere umanitar, i a spus c, i dac biserica sa ar fi fost n fericita situaie de a deine mari proprieti de teren, tot ar fi susinut-o. Episcopul i dl. Schullerus au evideniat dificultile financiare pe care reforma le cauzase colilor minoritilor, iar unul sau doi dintre romnii de fa au replicat c i instituiile romneti de caritate au avut foarte multe de suferit. Mitropolitul a inut o cuvntate n cinstea Ligii i a idealurilor ei, i n cei mai prietenoi termeni ne-a urat noroc, spernd c vom nelege problema romneasc. I-am rspuns concis, subliniind importana civilizaiei specifice a poporului romn, cu sperana c variile nsuiri ale diferitelor rase conlocuitoare din Romnia Mare vor colabora ntru dezvoltarea i bunstarea ntregului stat romnesc. Dup prnz am pornit cu maina la Ocna Sibiului, nite bi amenajate destul de drgu, ntr-o zon frumoas cu ap foarte srat. Dl. Ionescu a spus c ar vrea s-mi explice situaia cu privire la zvonul care-l nspimntase pe dl. Schullerus, i anume c colile confesionale vor fi desfiinate i nlocuite prin coli de stat. Situaia era urmtoarea: cnd fostele coli maghiare au fost preluate de ctre statul romn, profesorii colilor romne ortodoxe s-au plns c salariile lor sunt mai mici dect cele ale profesorilor din colile maghiare. Din aceast pricin ei au cerut Guvernului s-i numeasc funcionari de stat, ceea ce li s-a garantat n mod individual, ns fr a aduce vreun fel de atingere colilor confesionale care nu sunt coli de stat. A fost o simpl nelegere economic n favoarea profesorilor acelora n particular. Eu personal nu neleg n ce msur aceasta nu i-a adus pe profesorii colilor ortodoxe ntr-o poziie privilegiat n comparaie cu profesorii din colile minoritilor. n aceeai noapte am plecat spre Cluj. E. C. 2 / 8 / 23 * ** Am ajuns la Cluj la 2 august, i am fost ntmpinai la gar de ctre membrii prefecturii (noul prefect nc nu ajunsese), de ctre primar, de dl. Gza Kiss, deputat de ras ungar (ginerele ministrului Finanelor din Ungaria). De asemenea au fost prezeni Dr. Eugen Bianu, inspector general pentru Siebenbrgen /Transilvania, n orig. /, i dl. Emil Isac, inspector al Artelor Frumoase. Nu am neles prea bine poziia pe care o ocup acesta din urm, dar tot timpul ct a fost cu noi a vorbit despre teatre, i ne-a artat n Cluj un teatru maghiar i un teatru romnesc.

Dup o scurt discuie la gar, unde am servit i primul mic-dejun, am fost s vizitm cteva instituii religioase i colare. nainte de a porni la drum, eu totui le-am menionat gazdelor noastre c ar fi de dorit, dac nu cumva se gndiser deja la aceasta, s-i dea dl. Ugron, fost ministru al Ungariei la Bucureti, care acum locuiete la Cluj (persoana care venise s m vad la Bucureti), posibilitatea de a fi prezent. Mi-au rspuns imediat c se poate aranja, i la scurt timp dup aceea a reieit c dl. Ugron se afla deja pe lista oaspeilor invitai s ne ntlneasc, fapt pentru care mi-am exprimat satisfacia. Condui de unul dintre profesori, am fost la Universitate, vizitnd diferitele sale spaii, clinicile medicale, biblioteca etc. Din cte am neles, biblioteca are doi directori. Unul dintre ei, Dr. Gyalui19, un ungur, este acolo de mai bine de 30 de ani. El ne-a spus c Guvernul romn pstreaz cu mare grij biblioteca, iar noi am trecut prin lista personalului, care arta un mare numr de maghiari att n funcii superioare ct i n funcii inferioare n bibliotec. Se deschisese o sal de lectur pentru copii, cu cri ungureti i romneti, foarte bine utilizat. Apoi am vzut diferite coli confesionale, i, precum am amintit deja, teatrul romnesc i pe cel unguresc. Cnd ne aflam ntr-una din cldirile Universitii, am primit cartea de vizit a dl. Carol Nagy, Evque reform de Transylvanie, ntrebndu-m cnd i unde am putea avea o discuie de cteva minute nainte de prnzul aceleiai zile. I-am rspuns secretarului su, care mi adusese nota, c programul nostru era foarte aglomerat n dimineaa aceea, dar c sunt bucuros s fiu la dispoziia episcopului imediat dup prnz. Cnd am ajuns la cldirea colii unitariene, s-a ntmplat c ne-am ntlnit cu episcopul unitarian chiar la intrarea principal, aa c ne-a condus n biroul su. Astfel am aflat c demnitarii ecleziastici ai oraului deciseser n ziua anterioar s nu accepte invitaiile care urmau a fi fcute pentru masa de prnz. Urmtoarea not, datat n 2 august, mi-a fost nmnat:
A Monsieur Colban, Secrtaire gnral de la Ligue des Nations: Monsieur, Les soussigns ont recu la ci-jointe invitation pour assister un djeuner donn en lhonneur de la dlgation de la Ligue des Nations. Nous disons ainsi pour les personnes qui arrangent ce djeuner, que pour les personnes en lhonneur desquelles il est arrang, la responsabilit que nous avons visvis des intrts de nos Eglises nous empche, notre grand regret, dy prendre part. Nous ne voudrions donner occasion ce que les conversations ventuelles dans le cadre dun djeuner pussent tre consideres qualifies comme une discussion fond de la situation et des dolances des Eglises appartenant la minorit. Mais, comme il est dailleurs de notre devoir, nous vous prions de vouloir bien disposer et de notre personne et des documents que nous pouvons prsenter pour ltude serieuse et detaille de notre situation, si la dlgation trouve le temps ncssaire pour sen occuper. Mais nous devons avouer, que ltude de quelques heures nous parat trs insuffisant pour ce propos. Nous regretterions vivement si loccasion ntait pas donne aux Eglises minoritaires de prsenter leurs dolances fondes lhonorable dlgation de la Ligue des Nations et si ainsi larrive de la dlgation, attendue par nous avec de si grandes esprances, devrait rester sans bienfaisants resultats pour les minorits. Nous avons lhonneur, Monsieur, de vous prier de vouloir bien agrer lexpression de notre haute considration. (signe) Ferencz Charles Nagy

Evque de lEglise Unitaire Dr. Gusztav Kirchknopf Cur de lEglise luthrienne de lEglise catholique de Cluj. Cluj, le 2 aot 1923.

Evque de lEglise reforme de Transylvanie Dr. Jos. Hirschler (?) Le chanoine abb mitr Cur de Cluj

Invitaia anexat scrisorii era urmtoarea:

Primria oraului Cluj No. 3229 1923. pres. INVITAIUNE Joi 2 August urmeaz a sosi n Cluj cu trenul accelerat Dnii delegai ai Ligei Naiunilor, cari vor rmne n oraul nostru pn la 7. 30 seara cnd vor continua drumul spre Oradea Mare cu trenul accelerat. La ora 1 se va servi un dejun la Parcul comunal. Aducndu-V aceasta la cunotin, avem onoare a V ruga s binevoii a lua parte i Dvoastr la dejunul oferit de Ministrul de Externe n onoarea acestor reprezentani. Cluj, 1 August 1923 Prefectul n concediu Primar: Octavian Utalea (signed) A. Mou Episcopia Unitar Loco

Dup ce m-am consultat cu dl. Hoden i cu dl. Azcarate, i avnd acordul dl. Ionescu i al dl. Dianu, care erau prezeni, am decis s rspund trimisului episcopului reformat care adusese scrisoarea, c a fost o nenelegere, pentru c n mod cert suntem foarte bucuroi s putem purta o discuie serioas cu el i colegii si dup-amiaz, dar atunci desigur i ateptm s vin la mas. Dac vor veni, atunci i noi vom merge la biroul unuia dintre episcopi la ora 4 dup-mas. Episcopul unitarian a prut s agreeze aceast soluie i, dac am neles bine, a preluat asupra lui sarcina de a-i contacta pe ceilali semnatari ai scrisorii din 2 august. La masa de prnz au fost prezente, n afar de membrii Secretariatului, urmtoarele persoane: Dl. Popovici (prefectul Poliiei). Secretarul Bisericii Episcopale Ortodoxe. Dl. Emil Isac (inspector de Arte Frumoase). Dl. G. Lecca. Inspectorul Bianu. Dr. Gza Kiss (deputat). Dl. Fauernig (consulul austriac). Dl. Frasch (consulul cehoslovac). Consulul francez. Dl. Dianu. Inspectorul Pteancu. Dr. S. Dragomir (profesor al Universitii). Dr. Fischer.

Dl. Adler (preedintele Comitetului Evreilor Ortodoci). Consilierul Moge. Dl. Glasner (ef-rabinul). Dr. Elic Dianu (episcop greco-catolic). Dl. Iacobovici (rectorul Universitii). Domnul i Doamna general Florescu. Canonicul Balzs (romano-catolic.). Dl. Nagy (episcop al Bisericii Reformate). Dl. Ferencz (episcopul Bisericii Unitariene). Rezult de aici c att episcopii, ct i canonicul Bisericii Catolice au venit la masa de prnz. Preotul luteran nu a aprut, dar ne-a spus, cnd am trecut pe la biroul lui dup-mas, c nu a fost nicidecum informat asupra nelegerii la care se ajunsese, i c regret foarte mult c nu a fost de fa. n timpul prnzului am discutat ndeosebi cu episcopii unitarian i reformat (amndoi maghiari) anumite chestiuni colare, dar am decis s nu purtm o discuie serioas pn la ntlnirea de la ora 4 dup-mas la biroul episcopului reformat. Dup prnz, ef-rabinul dl. Glasner i preedintele Comitetului Evreilor Ortodoci, dl. Adler, m-au luat deoparte i mi-au spus pe scurt, dar n modul cel mai emfatic, c ei nu au nici un fel de plngeri, c ei sunt ceteni loiali ai noului Guvern i singura lor dorin este ca Guvernul i poporul romn s neleag aceasta. La ora 4 membrii Secretariatului, dl. Ionescu, dl. Pteancu i dl. Dianu au ajuns la biroul episcopului reformat. Acolo i-am aflat pe episcopul unitarian i pe canonicul Bisericii Catolice. i dl. Ugron era prezent ca translator. Au mai fost de fa nc dou sau trei persoane, care cred c sunt secretarii diferiilor episcopi. Am impresia c dl. Hoden i poate i dl. Azcarate au luat notie n cursul discuiei. De aceea eu voi reda doar un scurt sumar, cu att mai mult cu ct memoria nu este capabil s rein toate detaliile. Episcopul reformat a nceput prin a arta c pn n ultimele minute ei nu aveau alt tire despre planurile noastre dect c vom prsi oraul dup-mas devreme, i acesta a fost motivul pentru care s-au gndit c nu e potrivit s vin la masa de prnz, riscnd astfel s fie nelei greit n ideea lor c o scurt conversaie la masa de prnz poate fi considerat o discuie deplin i sincer asupra unor chestiuni de extrem importan. Am rspuns printr-o scurt explicitare a caracterului misiunii noastre. Am adugat c a fi foarte bucuros s aud ce au de spus cei prezeni. Episcopul reformat a spus c nu exist nici un motiv s credem c dorina lor de prezervare a colilor, bisericilor i a limbii maghiare este un rezultat al iredentismului. Minoritile cred, n schimb, c au dreptate s considere c o atitudine ostil exist din partea Guvernului romn. Apoi, n replic la ntrebarea mea dac ar avea de subliniat anumite puncte speciale, el a menionat decretul romnesc care limiteaz obligaia statului de a plti salariile protopopilor doar la cazurile n care protopopiatul este compus dintr-un oarecare numr de parohii. A mai menionat decretul prin care posturile vacante de preoi nu trebuie acoperite fr a se face apel la Guvern, n cazul n care parohia numr sub 300 de credincioi. Dl. Ionescu a rspuns la cele dou plngeri n modul n care mi explicase i mie chestiunile. (Vezi notele mele din 29 iulie.)

Episcopul a continuat, amintind anumite stipulaii ale noii Constituii a Romniei (articolele 22 i 72), care arat, spunea el, c bisericile minoritilor nu sunt tratate n acelai mod ca i Biserica Ortodox a majoritii. El considera acestea ca fiind contrare prevederilor tratatului minoritilor. Am spus c tratatul prescrie faptul c diferena de religie nu trebuie n nici un chip s devin motivul unui tratament diferit. Atunci dl. Ugron a intervenit, spunnd: Aceasta nseamn c diferitele biserici trebuie tratate exact n acelai fel. Nu mi s-a prut potrivit s afirm c nu sunt de acord cu el, dar cred c cei de fa au simit oarecum c n acest punct exist o diferen de opinie. Episcopul a mai fcut o amnunit dare de seam asupra concepiei fundamentale a relaiilor dintre biseric i stat, n conformitate cu legile maghiare, i a evideniat faptul, c dup prerea lui, Guvernul intervine n autonomia bisericii. Discuia a evaluat apoi situaia financiar a colilor confesionale i alte chestiuni. Cred c am dreptate atunci cnd afirm c nici un element nou de interes nu a mai aprut. De fapt, am fost destul de uimit c ni s-a spus att de puin fa de ceea ce tiam de dinainte. n cursul discuiilor mi-au fost nmnate dou hrtii, una de ctre episcopul unitarian, cealalt de ctre canonicul catolic20, ambele coninnd plngeri specifice. I le voi arta dl. Ionescu i i le voi trimite n copie din Geneva. Una dintre plngeri, coninut n hrtia canonicului catolic (cu no. 4), a fost discutat destul de pe larg. Se refer la chestiunea dac ordinele religioase vor avea dreptul s predea n colile lor n orice alt limb dect limba romn. Punctul de vedere pe care dl. Pteancu l-a explicat la aceast ntrunire susine c ordinele religioase nu sunt instituii naionale, ci strine, i nu li se poate permite s lucreze dect n interes public. Ministerul Instruciunii Publice este deci de prere c a sosit timpul s se introduc limba romn n colile secundare ale acestor ordine. n Oradea Mare am vizitat una din aceste coli i am gsit cadrele didactice foarte suprate din cauza acestui decret, care, ni s-a spus, foarte probabil va avea drept consecin faptul c muli copii nu vor mai urma de fel nvmntul secundar, ci vor fi trimii la lucru sau li se va da o altfel de ocupaie. Episcopul reformat a menionat n timpul discuiei o afirmaie atribuit minitrilor actualului Guvern, i anume c invocarea tratatului minoritilor ar nsemna trdare, i m-a ntrebat ce cred despre aceasta. I-am spus c desigur nu-mi pot exprima nici o prere n legtur cu ceea ce au spus sau nu au spus diferii minitri i c o cunoatere precis a unor astfel de fapte. Cred, totui, c este destul de natural ca minitrii Guvernului s evidenieze faptul c ei nu pot permite minoritilor s se constituie, ca s zic aa, parte ntr-un proces mpotriva propriului lor Guvern. Tratatul nu recunoate minoritilor o asemenea poziie. Tratatul pune la punct colaborarea ntre Guvern i Liga Naiunilor n scopul de a gsi soluii numeroaselor probleme delicate ivite din faptul c n Europa de dup rzboi subzist considerabile minoriti rasiale, religioase i lingvistice, ns, de exemplu, ar fi un lucru imposibil s permit minoritilor s dea n judecat propriul lor Guvern n faa Curii Internaionale sau n faa Consiliului Ligii Naiunilor. Membrii Consiliului provenii din diferite state urmeaz s decid ce pai trebuie ntreprini n fiecare caz, dar minoritile nsele nu pot iniia nici o aciune. Pe de alt parte, minoritile sunt libere s-i nainteze vederile n petiii adresate Ligii Naiunilor. Cred, totui, c poate nu este cel mai bun lucru s trimii acuzaii mpotriva unui Guvern, care acuzaii sunt adesea scrise ntr-o viziune unilateral i se bazeaz mai mult pe temeri fa de viitor dect pe fapte reale. Am sugerat c o soluie mai bun ar fi aceea ca minoritile, atunci cnd doresc ca Secretariatul Ligii s fie mai bine informat, s ne scrie, ns nu sub nfiarea unei petiii oficiale. n asemenea cazuri, firete, mi voi rezerva dreptul de a trimite o copie Guvernului romn. Dl. Ionescu, fr a-i exprima

categoric opinia, a prut s fie total de acord cu ceea ce am spus. Totui episcopul reformat a spus c pentru ei problema se pune astfel: dac ei ar scrie Secretariatului, nu cumva Guvernul Romniei ar considera c au comis o aciune neloial? La aceasta am gsit cu cale s nu rspund. Discuia a durat 2 ore i jumtate, iar excursia cu maina pe care ar fi trebuit s o facem s-a suspendat. Dup aceast ntrunire, am schimbat adresele cu reprezentanii celorlalte corpuri religioase din ora, i l-am vizitat i pe preotul luteran (Dr. Gusztv Kirchknopf), care cred c am spus-o i mai nainte i-a exprimat marele regret c nu a fost informat despre modificarea de program, conform creia i el ar fi trebuit s fie prezent la prnz. Dl. Ionescu mi-a spus mai trziu c, totui, acest preot este o persoan destul de suspect care duce o propagand maghiar vehement. Am cinat la gar cu aceleai persoane care ne ntmpinaser la sosirea din dimineaa aceea. n timpul cinei mi s-a spus c la ntrunirea din casa episcopului reformat a fost de fa i un ziarist, care a luat notie. Am fost foarte uimit, i i-am spus dl. Dianu c a vrea s se aduc la cunotina episcopului c eu sper c ne-am neles c discuia din casa sa a avut un caracter privat i nu va fi dat presei. Dl. Dianu l-a rugat pe dl. Kiss s aranjeze cu episcopul ca ziarele s nu publice ceea ce s-a vorbit la ntrunire. I-am spus dl. Kiss c, firete, n cazul acesta l consider responsabil pe episcop, ntruct ntlnirea a avut loc n casa lui i nu ni s-a spus c va fi prezent i un ziarist. Am plecat spre Oradea Mare, dormind n tren. E. C. 3 / 8 / 23 * ** Am ajuns la Oradea Mare n dimineaa de 3 august i am fost ntmpinai la gar de prefect, dl. Julien Peter, de primar i de prefectul Poliiei. Prefectul este de naionalitate elveian, dar triete n Romnia de 14 ani, cred, s-a cstorit cu o doamn romnc, i, desigur, judecnd dup atitudinea lui din timpul discuiilor avute pe teme colare i bisericeti n cursul vizitei noastre, susine o linie destul de naionalist-romneasc. Firete, sunt incapabil s judec calitile lui administrative i politice, dar n mare face impresie bun, dei pare uor prea autoritar n relaiile lui personale cu oamenii. nsoii de prefect i, din cte mi amintesc, de primar, am fost la un numr de coli i biserici, i, pentru c totul a fost extraordinar de bine organizat, am putut vedea foarte multe instituii n timpul dimineii. Am vizitat Institutul Catolic, patronat de Surorile Sf. Vinceniu, o coal catolic normal de biei, un liceu evreiesc, teatrul maghiar, biblioteca comunal i o coal primar a evreilor ortodoci. Dl. Hoden i dl. Azcarate au luat notie. ntr-unul din locurile pe care le-am vizitat, am fost abordat de ctre un brbat (Dr. G. Tbery, redactor al ziarului Nagyvrad), care mi-a spus c el reprezint Societatea Maghiar din Oradea Mare, i c n urm cu ctva timp a avut dificulti cu autoritile fiindc doreau s-l comemoreze pe Petfi. Autoritile au tiat considerabil din program, i, n optica Dr. Tbery, au mers prea departe. Cum Dr. Tbery a menionat i starea de asediu, l-am ntrebat pe prefect dac aceasta nseamn c autoritatea civil sau cea juridic este n vreun fel restrns sau limitat de ctre autoritatea militar. Prefectul mi-a rspuns c nu este cazul de aa ceva. Starea de asediu

poate fi considerat mai mult ca un avertisment pentru populaie, dect o alterare a puterii administrative. Ct privete restul, fac trimitere la notele dl. Hoden i ale dl. Azcarate. Am luat prnzul la prefect acas. Au fost prezente n jur de 20 de persoane, iar prefectul m-a anunat de dinainte c aici nu se vor repeta dificultile care se iviser la Cluj. Pe cele mai multe dintre persoane le vzusem n timpul rundei de diminea. Iat lista urmtoare: Domnul i doamna prefect Peter. Dr. Josif Moskovits (fost senator i ef al Partidului lui Tisza). Dr. Nicolai Zigre (fost prefect, fost subsecretar de stat la Interne). Dl. Sulyok tefan (episcop reformat). Dl. Miska Moskovits (fost deputat ungar). General Teodorescu (comandantul celei de-a doua divizii de vntori). Dr. Coriolan Bucico (primar). Dl. Ionescu D-na Valeria Jurca (magistrat). Dl. Ioan Ilie (magistrat). Dl. Lecca Episcopul Bijelik (episcop catolic). Dr. Havanyi Iuliu (rectorul Academiei de Drept). Dr. Magier Aurelian (protopop ortodox). Dl. Nicolai Popovici (fost prefect). Dl. Maternyi Imre (episcop luteran). Dl. Pteancu. Dl. Desideriu Tempeleanu (subprefect). Dr. Kecskemti Lipot (ef-rabin). Dr. Benjamin Fuchs (ef-rabin). Prnzul a fost foarte reuit, fiindc reprezentanii de fa ai diferitelor biserici i rase preau s se afle n termeni amicali. Prefectul a inut o cuvntare drgu n cinstea Ligii Naiunilor, iar eu am rspuns la aceast cuvntare. Dup prnz am plecat cu automobilul spre Salonta Mare, unde am vizitat muzeul maghiarului Jnos Arany, apoi am intrat ntr-una sau dou biserici, unde i-am vzut pe preoi, i n fine am mers la primrie, unde se strnsese o mare adunare a consilierilor comunali. Cu aceast ocazie, ca i n ocaziile similare, am interogat numeroase persoane despre chestiunile lingvistice, colare i bisericeti, i despre condiiile de via n general. Am cinat cu civa dintre consilierii comunali i cu alte cteva persoane, i am prsit Salonta Mare n aceeai sear, pornind spre Arad i dormind n tren. n cursul discuiilor mele cu prefectul, dl. Peter, acesta mi-a spus c este corect ca naionalitatea acionarilor societilor bancare i a altor societi s fie cea romn, dar aceasta nu nseamn ras romn, ci doar cetenie romn. El nsui a colaborat la fondarea unor astfel de societi, i era perfect sigur pe cele afirmate. Dl. Peter mi-a mai spus c sunt corect informat, atunci cnd i-am spus c Banca Naional fusese destul de strict garantnd bani unor bnci aparinnd minoritilor, dar, n opinia lui, aceasta se baza pe condiii speciale n fiecare caz, i nu indic o politic nefavorabil minoritilor. Intenia Guvernului n restrngerea plilor efectuate ctre anumite bnci este aceea de a mpiedica speculaiile valutare.

Ar trebui s menionez c dl. Peter a insistat de multe ori asupra importanei fundamentale a bunei administraii a acestor provincii. Mi-a spus confidenial c ar exista un plan susinut de ctre unul din membrii Guvernului, conform cruia prefecii ar trebui alei dintr-un grup de persoane agreate din motive politice de ctre Guvern. Dl. Peter credea c acest lucru ar fi foarte periculos, i m-a ntrebat dac a putea s transmit dl. Duca, pe care-l cunoate foarte bine, prerea sa. Am spus c sunt de acord cu el c sistemul pare destul de nenelept n actualele circumstane, i c sub o form sau alta voi ncerca s gsesc un prilej pentru a-i atrage atenia dl. Duca asupra acestui fapt. De asemenea dl. Peter mi-a spus c el va prsi prefectura, lucru pentru care nu prea deosebit de fericit. Totui soia lui mi-a spus c sper ca absena lui s fie de scurt durat i s revin curnd. E. C. 4 / 8 / 23 * ** n data de 4 august am ajuns la Arad, unde am fost ntmpinai la gar de ctre prefect, dl. Georgescu, de primar, prefectul Poliiei i de un cpitan. Dup micul dejun, am fost s vizitm cteva biserici, coli i alte instituii sociale. Dl. Azcarate i dl. Hoden au luat notie. Am descoperit c, la fel ca n toate celelalte locuri pe care le-am vzut n aceast parte a rii, cldirile colii i bisericii sunt foarte frumoase i c toate colile maghiare sunt extrem de bine dotate cu tot materialul necesar nvmntului. Ulterior cineva mi-a spus c Guvernul maghiar pusese mare accent n a avea cele mai bune coli maghiare n aceast parte de ar, i aceasta de dragul propagandei, deoarece chiar i colile din Budapesta de multe ori nu erau att de bine dotate i nu aveau ntotdeauna cldiri att de bune precum aceste coli. Una din colile vizitate a fost un liceu mare pentru pregtirea viitoarelor nvtoare. Directrice mi-a spus c frumoasa cldire, foarte bine dotat cu tot materialul didactic necesar, fusese ocupat nainte de ctre o coal ungureasc, dar a fost preluat de ctre statul romn i transformat ntr-un liceu de fete. Dl. Ionescu mi-a explicat c puini maghiari au dorit s aib coala, iar acelora care nainte vreme urmaser orele acelei coli li s-au acordat faciliti pentru a-i continua studiile la alte coli n care se folosete limba maghiar. Dl. Dianu mi-a spus c Regele i Regina vor trece prin Arad n dimineaa aceea, i m-a ntrebat dac vreau s merg la gar s-i vd; m-am gndit c este o idee bun, aa c am mers toi la gar. Am purtat o scurt discuie cu Regele, salutnd-o de asemenea i pe Regin. Regele m-a ntrebat dac am vzut tot ceea ce dorisem s vd, iar eu i-am confirmat, spunndu-i c vzusem tot ce fusese posibil s vd ntr-un timp att de scurt, i c suntem foarte recunosctori pentru toate nlesnirile acordate nou, care ne-au permis s dobndim att de bune cunotine asupra condiiilor romneti. De la gar ne-am dus s vedem o mare fabric de locomotive i vagoane de tren. Directorul [R. Soepkez] ne-a fcut ghidajul. Mi-a spus c este director nc de dinainte de rzboi. A spus c este maghiar. Cred c este evreu maghiar. Fabrica are cam 2. 000 de muncitori. Nu se face nici o diferen de ras sau religie, i un mare numr de muncitori sunt unguri. Acelai lucru este valabil i pentru personalul funcionresc. Directorul mi-a mai spus c producia este aproape independent de importurile din strintate. Au n ar lemn, fier i crbune, i aproape toate cele necesare. Ei i produc singuri cea mai mare parte a

componentelor produselor lor. A mai spus c pe moment fac reparaii pentru Guvernul romn, i nu au comenzi pentru construcia de alte locomotive. L-am ntrebat dac Guvernul ar apela la strintate, mai nainte de a-i da lui i companiei lui ansa competiiei. Mi-a spus c n mod cert cererea i se va face companiei lui, mai nainte oricrei companii strine. Ct despre modul de constituire a companiei, o parte nsemnat a aciunilor se afl n minile unui italian [Camillo Castiglione]. Apoi am luat prnzul la hotel mpreun cu prefectul i alte persoane, inclusiv dl. Tomulescu, deputatul judeean. Soia prefectului a fost i ea de fa. Ea mi-a spus c fratele ei s-a cstorit cu o doamn norvegianc, i o parte a conversaiei a fost dedicat relaiilor dintre Romnia i Norvegia n timpul rzboiului, i premii acordate romnilor de diferite ri n acea perioad. Dl. Tomulescu i-a exprimat marea lui apreciere pentru felul n care romnii fuseser primii n Norvegia. Dup prnz am pornit cu maina spre Pecica, care este un sat mare cu populaie parial maghiar i parial romneasc. Am fost ntmpinai mai nti de partea maghiar a locuitorilor, i am avut o scurt discuie cu preotul lor, care mi-a zis c exist deplina libertate religioas i c cele dou jumti ale populaiei triesc foarte bine mpreun. Limba maghiar este folosit n biseric i n coal. Apoi ne-am dus la romni, care se aflau la cteva sute de metri de primul loc, i acolo am discutat, de asemenea, cu preotul. Acesta mi-a confirmat n toate amnuntele cele spuse de colegul su de la biserica maghiar, i a subliniat bunele relaii ntre diferitele pri ale populaiei. n ambele locuri erau de fa cteva sute de persoane. Am fost condui la ceea ce s-ar putea numi cmin cultural, i a fost limpede c locuitorii vdesc un foarte mare interes fa de vizita noastr. n acest caz ca i n alte cteva, este poate dificil de spus dac interesul lor provenea din prezena prefectului, sau dac se datora prezenei funcionarilor Ligii Naiunilor, ori dac nu cumva ranii nu aveau o idee tocmai clar despre scopul acestor ntruniri. Totui, discuiile pe care le-am purtat pretutindeni cu diferite persoane de fa mi-au creat impresia c n orice caz conductorii locuitorilor erau deplin contieni de calitatea noastr ca delegaie a Ligii Naiunilor, i n cuvntrile inute cu multe prilejuri Liga Naiunilor a fost menionat n mod special. Cnd eram fotografiai, i acest lucru s-a ntmplat frecvent, funcionarii Secretariatului erau ntotdeauna plasai n prim-plan, iar prefectul i primarul n spatele nostru. Apoi am mers cu maina spre frontiera ungar, strbtnd pusta (stepa), i napoi la Arad, iar de acolo mai departe spre Pncota, unde am cinat i am dormit. n cursul acestor varii excursii, am discutat cu diferite persoane care erau cu noi asupra caracterului etnografic al locuitorilor prin care treceam i al mprejurimilor lor. Am fost informat, i ntr-o oarecare msur am avut ocazia s verific eu nsumi faptul c, dei eram foarte aproape de grani, populaia nu este n nici un caz un bloc de maghiari. Dimpotriv, aici locuiesc muli romni i ei constituie un element considerabil al populaiei. Dl. Tomulescu i alii mi-au mai spus c un numr considerabil de romni triesc i de cealalt parte a frontierei. E. C. 5 / 8 / 23 *

** Duminic, pe data de 5 august, am fcut o excursie la locul numit Mini, unde am fost ntmpinai de o mare mulime de romni i vabi. De-a lungul ntregului drum de la Pncota la Mini, de-a lungul liniei de tramvai pe care am parcurs-o se nir case. Arhitectura acestor case, ca i obiceiurile locuitorilor fac evident faptul c aceti oameni sunt esenialmente romni. Acelai lucru este valabil i n Mini. Acolo am vizitat coala de viticultur i o mare fabric de vin i spirt. Directorul acesteia din urm este vab, aa cum sunt nu puini dintre steni, cu toate c vabii se afl n absolut minoritate fa de romni. Am vorbit cu mai multe persoane (aici, ca peste tot n Transilvania, limba pe care am folosit-o cu cel mai mare succes a fost germana), i i-am ntrebat despre starea lor. Mi s-a spus c starea lor economic este bun n general, ceea ce cred c se datoreaz faptului c acest inut este o zon viticol excelent. Cele dou ramuri ale populaiei, romnii i vabii, am neles c triesc mpreun destul de fericite i fr friciuni menionabile. Dup ce am revenit la Pncota cu tramvaiul, am plecat la Sntana, unde am fost primii de mari mulimi. Acesta este un orel vbesc, locuit aproape exclusiv de rani vabi. Artau extrem de prosperi. Ca replic la o ntrebare pe care am pus-o, mi s-a rspuns c aici aproape toi sunt milionari. ranii au fiecare pmntul lor i casa lor, iar starea financiar a orelului este foarte bun. Mi s-a spus c n toamna viitoare vor fi asfaltate toate trotuarele. Atunci cnd i-am ntrebat cum i pot permite aa ceva, n actualele condiii economice dificile, mi s-a dat rspunsul c aici aproape toi sunt milionari. Am fost ntmpinai de primar i alte persoane proeminente ale orelului, ca i de preotul romano-catolic. Se ntocmise un program plin al recepiei noastre, ce includea focuri de artificii n chip de salut din partea grzii comunale, o foarte drgu trup de rani mbrcai n ceea ce cred c este uniforma lor vbeasc specific. nsoii de preotul catolic am mers la biseric. Cu acest prilej, ca i n multe altele, prefectul i autoritile care erau cu noi s-au meninut n fundal, pentru a scoate n eviden faptul c oaspei ai orelului erau membrii Secretariatului, iar nu autoritile romne. Biserica a fost plin ochi de oameni, cteva sute. Cldirea bisericii este foarte drgu. Slujba nu se sfrise, dar a fost amnat pn la sosirea noastr. S-a slujit numai n german, crile de rugciune fiind i ele n aceeai limb. Apoi am vizitat casa unuia dintre rani, gsind acolo toate semnele prosperitii economice i ale bunstrii. Sunt convins c aceasta nu este n nici un caz una din casele ieite din comun. Am luat prnzul la casa primarului, unde preotul catolic a inut n german un discurs elocvent n cinstea Regelui. n acest discurs i-a exprimat puternicul sentiment al loialitii populaiei vbeti fa de Casa regal. A menionat faptul c Regele nsui are snge german n vine. A spus c vabii sunt ferm decii s fie ceteni buni i loiali ai Romniei Mari. Mie mi-a spus, att nainte ct i dup cuvntare, c toat lumea convieuiete fericit i nu sunt plngeri. Am ntrebat pe una sau dou persoane, dac reforma agrar nu a impietat asupra panicei viei rurale, i mi s-a spus c nu s-a ntmplat aa ceva, deoarece, cu excepia a 20-30 persoane, toat lumea avea pmnt, i n ceea ce privete pe cele 20-30 persoane, li s-au acordat faciliti pentru a primi pmnt altundeva dac ar cere. De la Sntana ne-am deplasat cu maina napoi la Arad, unde ne-am desprit att de dl. Pteancu i de dl. Tomulescu, ct i de celelalte persoane care fuseser cu noi, cu excepia

prefectului i a soiei lui, care ne-au nsoit la Timioara. Aici ne-am desprit de dl. Azcarate, care a luat trenul spre Geneva. Dl. Hoden s-a rentors la Arad, ca s ia trenul spre Budapesta, iar d-oara Harris i cu mine, mpreun cu dl. Ionescu, dl. Dianu i dl. Lecca, ne-am ntors la Bucureti. La Timioara am avut timp prea puin, pentru a putea face vreun studiu. E. C. 5 / 8 / 23 * ** n dimineaa de luni, 6 august, am ajuns la Bucureti. Am luat prnzul cu dl. Lecca i dl. Juracu, de la Ministerul de Externe. Discuia nu a avut o deosebit relevan, dar a putea meniona faptul c ambii domni mai sus-amintii au fost victime ale reformei agrare, i c n special dl. Lecca s-a plns destul de amarnic de pierderea moiilor care fuseser n minile familiei sale vreme destul de ndelungat. Amndoi au czut de acord c exproprierea a fost egal cu confiscarea, dat fiind faptul c indemnizaia pltit a fost foarte, foarte mic. Aceasta s-a ridicat abia la 2% din valoarea real, i a fost pltit n obligaiuni de stat, care la rndul lor sunt cotate cam la 40 % din valoarea lor. Astfel indemnizaia atinge abia 1 % din valoarea de pia real. Dl. Duca nu era la Bucureti, i urma s soseasc aici abia a doua zi. De aceea mi-am petrecut cea mai mare parte a dup-amiezii n compania dl. Ionescu, care m-a nsoit la cumprturi, i am mai discutat o dat o parte din chestiunile abordate anterior. La cin, d-oara Harris i cu mine am fost oaspeii secretarului general al Ministerului de Externe, dl. Filodor. De fa erau i dl. Diamandi, dl. Ionescu, dl. Arion, dl. Juracu, dl. Dianu i dl. Lecca. I-am prezentat dl. Filodor cele mai clduroase mulumiri din partea mea i a colegilor mei, pentru toate facilitile care ne-au fost acordate n cursul cltoriei, spunndu-i c vzusem i intrasem n contact cu orice persoan pe care am fi dorit s-o vedem n aceast mprejurare, i c, n pofida timpului foarte scurt pe care l-am avut la dispoziie, cred c am dobndit o foarte bun imagine general asupra condiiilor politice, sociale, economice i de alt natur n acele regiuni din Romnia prin care cltorisem. L-am felicitat pe dl. Arion pentru numirea sa ca ministru. El va rmne n continuare eful Seciei de pres a Ministerului de Externe. De aceea numirea sa are, cel puin deocamdat, numai un caracter onorific. Dl. Filodor m-a ntrebat ce impresie general mi-am fcut despre exactitatea afirmaiilor coninute n diferite petiii primite de noi, acum c fusesem la faa locului. I-am rspuns c am avut putina de a verifica faptul c petiiile sunt exagerate n multe puncte, iar c n anumite puncte creeaz chiar o impresie cu totul fals. Am senzaia c tendina general a politicii Guvernului romn fa de minoritile sale este mult mai bun dect era de ateptat, dar c, desigur, anumite chestiuni, de importan mai mare sau mai mic, nc dau natere la dificulti. Cred c cea mai bun soluie a acestor dificulti este stabilirea celei mai bune administraii n provinciile n care minoritile locuiesc n proporie mai mare. Dl. Filodor mi-a spus c este contient de acest lucru, dar c necazul este c Romnia nu are nc format personalul administrativ n numr suficient de mare. Din punct de vedere administrativ, Romnia este un stat foarte tnr, i chiar Vechiul Regat /este un stat tnr/, i cnd au avut de

administrat o suprafa mai mare s-au confruntat cu lipsa considerabil a administratorilor potrivii. Am spus c mie mi se pare vital s se fac efortul suprem de a trimite n aceste provincii pe cei mai buni prefeci i cei mai buni funcionari din administraie, indiferent de opiniile lor politice. Cred c dl. Filodor a fost de acord cu mine, dar nu tiu dac poziia sa n Ministerul de Externe i permite s exercite vreo influen asupra Guvernului romn n aceast privin. Sunt nclinat s cred c nu acesta este cazul. I-am dat dl. Ionescu o copie a hrtiilor care mi fuseser nmnate la Cluj, spunndu-i c nu intenionez s le nmnez oficial Guvernului su. E. C. 7 / 8 / 23 * ** Pe 7 august, dl. Duca mi-a dat ntlnire pentru aceeai dup-mas. Majoritatea timpului am petrecut-o lucrnd la hotel, apoi am luat prnzul cu dl. Lecca i dl. Juracu. Discuia purtat cu ei a avut aproximativ acelai caracter ca i discuia din ziua anterioar, rotindu-se n special n jurul chestiunii reformei agrare. Dup-masa l-am vizitat pe dl. Duca la Ministerul de Externe. M-a primit cu extrem prietenie, i dac i-au fost nmnate rapoarte asupra cltoriei noastre ceea ce eu consider a fi un lucru sigur -, aceste rapoarte au fost cu certitudine foarte apreciative la adresa modului n care i-au desfurat munca membrii Secretariatului. I-am mulumit dl. Duca pentru facilitile acordate nou, pentru ospitalitatea oferit nou tuturor de ctre Guvernul romn. I-am spus c scopul principal al vizitei noastre n Romnia fusese acela de a stabili contact direct ntre Guvernul romn i Secretariatul Ligii Naiunilor, i c eu cred c acest scop a fost atins. Dl. Duca a spus c este sigur de aceasta, spernd c neleg c sunt binevenit oricnd n Romnia, i c mi se vor acorda ntotdeauna toate facilitile de a vedea i auzi orice a dori s vd sau s aud. Am continuat apoi prin a spune c, n ceea ce privete n particular aspectul muncii mele, problema minoritilor, sunt bucuros s afirm c am strns o bogat colecie de informaii, i c sunt convins c ntr-un timp att de scurt nu a fi putut vedea ori auzi mai mult dect fcusem. Programul cltoriei noastre se dovedise a fi extrem de bine pus la punct, dei puin obositor. Dl. Dianu i dl. Lecca ne fuseser deosebit de utili i cred c un mare sentiment de cordialitate se stabilise ntre ei i noi cei din Secretariat. Vorbisem foarte franc unii cu ceilali n timpul cltoriei. I-am mulumit dl. Duca pentru c ni-i dduse drept nsoitori ai misiunii noastre. De asemenea, l-am rugat pe dl. Duca s fie bun s transmit minitrilor Cultelor i Instruciunii Publice cele mai calde mulumiri din partea mea, pentru faptul c i trimiseser pe dl. Ionescu i dl. Pteancu cu noi. Dl. Duca a spus c le va transmite cu siguran. Apoi am spus c, ntruct dl. Pteancu nu este deosebit de tare la limbi strine, nu fusese foarte uor de discutat cu el, n schimb dl. Ionescu, ale crui caliti excelente le-am subliniat, ne ajutase i n chestiuni colare, nu numai n cele bisericeti, care constituie sfera lui particular de competen. Am spus c pentru mine a fost o mare bucurie s vd cum dl. Ionescu a fost primit pretutindeni ca i un prieten i un om ale crui vederi neprtinitoare i impariale sunt incontestabile, chiar i atunci cnd, n unele cazuri, persoanele cu care am

intrat n contact nu erau de acord cu el. M gndisem doar c excelentele sale caliti ar fi fost i mai utile dac dnsul s-ar ocupa i de problemele colii. Dl. Duca a spus c apreciaz cele spuse de mine, dar necazul este c colile sunt nu numai confesionale, ci i de stat i private, i de aceea fusese necesar ca ntreaga problematic a colilor s fie subsumat Ministerului Instruciunii Publice. Am menionat marele ajutor pe care ni-l acordaser prefecii i celelalte autoriti n cursul cltoriei noastre i am spus c ntruct probabil nu-i pot face singuri reclam n faa Guvernului, a vrea s art c primirea ce ni se fcuse a fost ntotdeauna deosebit de bun, iar aranjamentele au fost excelente pentru noi. Am adugat c dintre aceti prefeci i-am remarcat pe civa ca fiind oameni foarte capabili, fr a meniona ns nume. I-am fcut dl. Duca o scurt trecere n revist a felului n care se derulase munca noastr; cum fuseserm ntmpinai de mari mulimi, de ctre funcionari, de reprezentanii bisericilor, colilor etc., cum vizitasem multe coli, biserici i alte instituii sociale; cum ne-am familiarizat cu condiiile generale din diferitele locuri etc. I-am menionat i faptul c am perceput n cadrul problemei minoritilor o mare diferen ntre zonele de ar care se nvecineaz cu Ungaria i restul rii. I-ar fi foarte uor Guvernului s acorde o libertate special secuilor i sailor, din partea crora ideea iredentismului este geografic imposibil. Am amintit excelenta impresie pe care mi-a fcut-o vizita la Sntana i de asemenea importana de a fi dobndit o imagine clar asupra relaiilor etnografice de ambele pri ale frontierei cu Ungaria, unde, cum descoperisem, populaia nu este n nici un caz att de compact maghiar cum crezusem anterior. I-am povestit i discuia noastr de la Cluj cu reprezentanii bisericilor minoritilor, i despre prezena dl. Ugron, i i-am spus c nenelegerea din partea lor a scopului vizitei noastre m-a determinat s le explic caracterul ei real. Dl. Duca m-a rugat s-mi exprim deschis dorinele legale legate de problema minoritilor, sau de orice alt problem privind Liga. I-am rspuns c, desigur, creierul meu nc nu i-a revenit, dup primirea unei asemenea bogii de impresii de toate felurile, i trebuie s ncerc s pun n ordine aceste impresii mai nainte de a putea spune care sunt punctele specifice care vor trebui luate n considerare n viitor, sau despre care a dori informaii suplimentare de la Guvernul romn. Totui, acum a putea spune c, n general, impresiile mele sunt mult mai favorabile dect ndrznisem s sper atunci cnd m bazam pe documentaia primit nainte de a veni aici. Avusesem cel mai bun prilej de a vedea c este total imposibil de a ajunge la o imagine real i adevrat asupra unor chestiuni att de complicate fr a avea contact personal cu ara respectiv i oamenii ei. De aceea, cltoria noastr a fost o mare reuit, i acum mi pun mai mari sperane n faptul c colile existente nu se vor ndeprta de principiile generale ale liberalismului i consideraiei fa de minoriti, principii pe care el /dl. Duca/ le susine att de fervent, i care constituie politica Guvernului su. El a rspuns c Guvernul romn nu adopt aceast politic de dragul minoritilor ca atare, ci fiindc tie c este n interesul Romniei ca toi cetenii ei s fie tratai ntr-o asemenea manier nct s le permit s fie mulumii i s fie loiali statului. Pe de alt parte, el se gndete c situaia actual, ct i privete pe anumii conductori ai minoritii maghiare, este aceea c oricte concesii li s-ar face, ei tot s-ar plnge. Ei sau familiile lor au fost timp de sute de ani guvernanii rii, i acum este greu pentru ei s accepte noua stare de lucruri. Apoi am menionat proiectul de lege asupra unificrii administrative a Romniei, i am spus c aceast lege este de un interes deosebit i n ceea ce privete consolidarea rii. Am

ntrebat dac a putea avea o copie dup proiectul de lege. Dl. Duca a promis c va ordona s-mi parvin una, copie pe care am primit-o ntr-adevr mai nainte de a prsi Ministerul. Am spus c dl. Ionescu mi dduse o copie a ultimului buget bisericesc, care m intereseaz foarte mult, i c a dori s am de asemenea o copie a bugetului colar. l rugasem pe dl. Pteancu s mi-o procure, i m gndeam c, dac n-o primesc pn la plecarea mea, aceasta ar putea fi remis Ministerului de Externe pentru a-mi fi trimis. Dl. Duca a spus c voi avea orice doresc. Cnd am spus apoi c am descoperit c problema reformei agrare se afl la baza majoritii dificultilor bisericeti i colare, dl. Duca mi-a replicat c, din punct de vedere financiar, statul se comportase cu instituiile minoritilor att de generos pe ct i permiseser finanele. I-am spus c mie mi va fi de un considerabil ajutor ca, atunci cnd voi explica situaia la Geneva ori altundeva, s am statistici artnd ct de mult pmnt fusese expropriat, ct de mult fusese mprit pn acum, i ct de mult se mprise diferitelor rase ale rii. Din mai multe surse, inclusiv de la dl. Duca nsui, obinusem deja informaia c nu se fcuse nici o diferen ntre rase, i c distribuirea pmntului expropriat ctre rani a nsemnat n multe cazuri fortificarea elementului rasial al minoritii. Acesta este un punct foarte important care trebuie susinut prin statistici. Dl. Duca a spus c va rezolva ca eu s primesc asemenea statistici. Dl. Duca a mai spus c i pune problema dac nu cumva ar trebui s traduc i s mpart membrilor Adunrii cele 3 memorii n chestiunile colii, bisericii i reformei agrare, pe care mi le dduse acum dou sptmni. I-am spus c eu consider c aceste acte sunt admirabile, i c ar fi un lucru foarte bun s fie comunicate membrilor Ligii i Adunrii, dar este rezonabil ca Secretariatul s se ocupe de aceasta, oferind Consiliului ori Adunrii informaii despre chestiunile romneti i, n spe, despre problemele minoritilor din Romnia. Practic, acum am certitudinea c, avnd n vedere vizita ntreprins de noi n Romnia, precum i colaborarea intim stabilit ntre Guvernul romn i funcionarii Ligii, nici nu se pune problema aducerii chestiunii minoritilor din Romnia n faa Consiliului la iniiativa oricruia dintre membrii si. Dl. Duca m-a ntrebat dac eu consider a fi neleapt trimiterea dl. Ionescu mpreun cu delegaia la Geneva n timpul Adunrii. I-am rspuns c sincer nu cred c este necesar, i dac cumva s-ar ivi vreo problem pe care nu a putea s-o rezolv eu personal n mod satisfctor, n mod cert m voi adresa delegaiei romne i nc ar fi timp destul pentru a se cntri dac este sau nu oportun ca dl. Ionescu s vin. Apoi am continuat prin a spune c plngerile pe care le ascultasem n cursul cltoriei noastre fuseser n general aceleai pe care le cunoteam deja din petiii. Foarte, foarte puine nouti aflasem. Impresia mea este c n chestiunile ecleziastice plngerile nu sunt de mare nsemntate, dar c tot n aceste chestiuni prevaleaz o anumit team fa de viitor. Totui m asigurasem c legea bisericilor, ce urmeaz a fi promulgat n viitorul apropiat, fusese alctuit ntr-o colaborare foarte strns cu bisericile minoritilor. neleg c se intenioneaz ca o dat n plus legea s le fie supus ateniei, mai nainte ca documentele s ajung n Jurnalul [Monitorul] Oficial. Dac el este de acord cu mine, voi mai citi o dat cu atenie actele, pentru a vedea c ele sunt n toate privinele gata de publicare, i apoi s aranjm s fie publicate ct mai repede. Dl. Duca a spus c este ntru-totul de acord. Apoi i-am amintit despre scrisoarea pe care o primisem de la dl. Grg, cnd eram la Suseni pe 29 iulie i despre rspunsul pe care i l-am dat. Dl. Duca a spus c i-ar fi plcut ca eu s-l ntlnesc pe dl. Grg, dar c este perfect de acord cu rspunsul meu.

Dl. Duca m-a ntrebat n ce form m gndesc c ar putea fi stabilit legtura cu Secretariatul prin ministrul romn din Berna. Am spus c cel mai simplu ar fi s scrie o scrisoare Secretarului General, n care s arate c Guvernul romn l numise pe ministrul din Berna ca reprezentant al su permanent la Lig, nsrcinat n special cu corespondena dintre Guvern i Lig. Aceast nelegere nu va putea, desigur, mpiedica Guvernul de a nu-l include pe ministru n delegaia sa la Adunare, i nici de a nu-l folosi n anumite cazuri ca purttor de cuvnt al su n Consiliu. Dl. Duca m-a rugat s aranjez cu dl. Filodor s fie pregtit o scrisoare n acest sens. Apoi m-a ntrebat dac este posibil s fie trimii mai mult dect 3 delegai la Adunare, adic dac alturi de cei 3 ar putea fi numii delegai-asisteni. Am spus c nimic nu contravine numirii de delegai tehnici sau asisteni, iar, dac guvernul lor dorete aa ceva, acestor delegai li se vor oferi locuri ntr-o comisie. I-am dat dl. Duca o copie a Circularei Biroului (Office Circular) asupra numirii unui membru de secie A al Seciei birourilor Internaionale (International Bureaux Section). Dl. Duca m-a rugat s-i dau puin timp s cugete asupra chestiunii. (Nu considerasem oportun s menionez aceast problem la sosirea mea n urm cu dou sptmni, ntruct nelesesem c exista un anumit sentiment mpotriva Secretariatului, din cauza poziiei dl. Lahovary, i atunci oferta numirii unui om care s dein funcia doar 2 ani ar fi putut fi considerat o prea mic compensaie. n particular, am vrut s atept, s vd dac a putea eu gsi pe cineva, mai nainte de a supune chestiunea ateniei ministrului. n aceast direcie, ns, nu am avut succes.) n cele din urm, dl. Duca m-a rugat s-i scriu deschis n legtur cu orice problem de interes, i ca rspuns la ntrebarea mea a spus c, firete, i-a putea scrie neoficial. Aceasta este cea mai bun cale de a trata chestiuni aidoma celor cu care sunt nsrcinat eu. La desprire, dl. Duca i-a rennoit nc o dat n termeni foarte hotri asigurarea c Guvernul romn este foarte mulumit c am venit, i a adugat c atunci cnd a spus au revoir, nu se referea la Geneva (dei spera c poate va putea veni la Adunare), ci la Romnia. Eu tot va trebui s merg n Basarabia, cum mi spusese mai demult. Dl. Duca a spus c, aa precum aflasem anterior de la dl. Lecca, ar dori foarte mult s iau cina n compania lui n seara aceea, dar, aa cum l informase dl. Lecca, ntruct eu sunt nerbdtor s m ntorc la munca mea de la Geneva, nu insist. Apoi am fost s-l vd pe dl. Filodor i, lundu-mi rmas-bun, i-am vorbit i despre scrisoarea ctre Secretarul General de acreditare a ministrului din Berna ca reprezentant permanent al Ligii. I-am spus c, desigur, ei vor lua n considerare dac este dezirabil din punctul lor de vedere s cear o copie special a documentelor tiprite i rennoite care s fie trimise direct la Bucureti. Dl. Arion, pe care l-am vzut apoi, mi-a spus c sper c va iei un lucru bun din legtura sa cu Secia de informare a Secretariatului. El personal este foarte interesat ca aceast legtur s fie optim. Apoi mi-am luat rmas-bun de la dl. Juracu, dl. Dianu i dl. Lecca. L-am ntrebat pe dl. Dianu dac ar trebui s las cartea mea de vizit, a dl. Hoden i a dl. Azcarate cuiva din Minister sau vreunei alte persoane. Dnsul mi-a spus c nu este necesar. i vzusem personal la Minister pe toi cei cu care intrasem n contact nemijlocit, i ministrul nsui va transmite complimentele mele ministrului Cultelor Publice i Instruciunii Publice. n ceea ce-i privete pe dl. Hoden i dl. Azcarate, toat lumea este la curent c ei nu au revenit la Bucureti.

n aceeai dup-mas, dl. Ionescu, pe la care nu putusem s trec n cursul dimineii, a venit s m vad la hotel. Am purtat o discuie de o or pe diferite probleme. I-am spus c dl. Duca sugerase c poate el ar trebui s vin la Geneva, dar c eu i replicasem c aceasta nu este necesar, cel puin deocamdat. A spus c este total de acord cu atitudinea mea. n timpul conversaiei noastre, care nu ar fi putut fi mai franc chiar dac ne-am fi cunoscut de ani de zile, m-a lsat s neleg limpede, c el se gndete c cel mai potrivit lucru ar fi ca el s fie nsrcinat i cu colile minoritilor. Totui, eu nu cred c el va ntreprinde ceva n acest sens, dar n orice caz este bine de tiut c aceasta este opinia sa, dac cumva chestiunea ar fi ridicat de dl. Duca i colegul su, ministrul Instruciunii Publice, n urma sugestiei pe care i-am fcut-o dl. Duca. Cu toate acestea, nu sunt nclinat s cred c dl. Duca va aciona deocamdat n vreun fel. Cred c va atepta s vad ce se alege de legea colilor. Dar, chiar dac n cele din urm legea colar se va dovedi mulumitoare, foarte, foarte multe vor depinde de aplicarea ei. Am credina c nu poate fi gsit un om mai bun dect dl. Ionescu, cruia s i se ncredineze aceast delicat sarcin. Situaia actual, n orice caz, nu e mulumitoare din punct de vedere administrativ, dac este adevrat ce mi s-a spus c ministrul Instruciunii Publice este un binecunoscut chirurg, iar adjunctul su n aceste chestiuni este dl. Pteancu. Cu toate bunele lui caliti personale i cu indiscutabila lui onestitate, dl. Pteancu totui nu are capacitatea administrativ necesar acum. Ministrul Instruciunii Publice pare a emite decrete aproape la fel de repede cum anumii guvernani emit bancnote de hrtie, iar rezultatul va fi analog: deprecierea valorii decretelor i dezorganizarea administraiei colilor. n pofida tuturor acestora, multe se vor pune la punct atunci cnd vom avea noua lege colar. D-oara Harris i cu mine am cinat mpreun cu dl. Dianu i dl. Lecca, nainte de a prsi Bucuretiul n direcia Geneva. Cred c amndoi erau bucuroi s se vad la captul foarte dificilei sarcini de a ne ghida n perioada celor dou sptmni, dar sunt sigur c sentimentele lor fa de noi erau foarte prieteneti. Dl. Lecca, la suprafa un om oarecum cinic, ne-a artat n ultimul minut cealalt fa a sa, cnd a pledat cazul Romniei i m-a rugat s nu uit dificultile pe de o parte, iar pe de alt parte dorina sincer a Romniei de a-i ocupa locul n rndul celor mai civilizate naiuni. I-am spus dl. Dianu c mi menin intenia exprimat anterior, de a trimite scrisori de mulumire prefecilor i poate nc la una-dou persoane care ne fuseser utile n chip special n cursul cltoriei noastre, i c firete, le voi transmite prin intermediul Ministerului de Externe, astfel nct ei s poat vedea tot ceea ce am fcut n legtur cu aceasta. El a spus c este foarte bine, ntruct aceasta va facilita primirea scrisorilor de ctre persoanele crora le sunt destinate. E. C. 8 / 8 / 23

NOTE 1. Din nefericire, unele cuvinte sau rnduri nu le-am putut descifra de pe fotocopia documentului. 2. Nu dispunem de aceste note. 3. D. Iancovici. 4. Nicolae Dianu. 5. Gheorghe Lecca. 6. Constantin Diamandi. 7. Constantin Banu.

8. Constantin Angelescu. 9. La Sinaia se inea o edin a Micii nelegeri. 10. Alexandru Constantinescu. 11. Rusia a ocupat Basarabia n anul 1812. 12. tefan Ugron. La 14 iulie 1923 consulul maghiar de la Bucureti era ntiinat de vizita iminent a lui Colban n Romnia, de ctre ministrul de externe maghiar. Data sosirii la Bucureti era considerat a fi 21 iulie. Colban era prezentat astfel: Nu este cu intenii rele dar este un individ care se apleac uor n faa autoritii. n acest moment este puternic influenat de Titulescu Rog ca Ugron Istvn s fie anunat ca imediat dup ce delegaia ajunge la Bucureti s ia contact cu acetia. De asemenea s fie anunai Grandpierre [Emil] i Jakabffy [Imre], eventual i alii. La 26 iulie 1923 consulul maghiar din Bucureti i transmitea ministrului de externe maghiar, Daruvry Gza, o informare despre prezena lui Colban n Romnia: Comisia Societii Naiunilor pentru studierea problemei minoritilor se spune n text sub conducerea lui E. A. Colban (care este cetean norvegian, nu suedez) a ajuns la Bucureti n 24 iulie. Sosirea lor a fost inut att de secret, nct nu a tiut nimic despre aceasta nici ambasadorul spaniol (cu toate c unul dintre delegai era concetean de-al lui). Rmnnd fidel indicaiei D-voastr l-am anunat din timp pe Ugron Istvn, care a plecat spre Bucureti pentru a sta la dispoziia delegailor i la dorina lor s le dea lmuriri [Corelarea aciunilor dintre Budapesta i oamenii politici maghiari din Romnia este evident]. ntlnirea a fost amnat datorit a dou impedimente: 1. romnii au izolat delegaia n mod ermetic fa de lumea de afar i 2. delegaii nii nu s-au interesat de problem... Amndou circumstanele, dei sunt chestiuni de amnunt, sunt att de caracteristice nct consider necesar prezentarea lor detaliat. Romnii nu au lsat singur delegaia nici o clip. Consulul afirm apoi c scrisoarea lui Ugron destinat lui Colban a ajuns la acesta doar prin intermediul unei doamne englezoaice domnioara Harris. Discuia dintre Colban i Ugron, din 26 iulie, a fost dezarmant. Cnd Ugron a spus c, aflndu-se din ntmplare n Bucureti (sic!), a considerat de obligaia sa s-i ofere serviciile comisiei, Colban a respins aceasta n mod hotrt, dar deosebit de politicos. Consulul susine c lui Ugron nu i s-a spus c delegaia ajunge la Cluj. Colban n raport afirm c i-am spus c probabil vom merge la Cluj, dar c nu cunosc data cnd vom ajunge acolo. i consulul conchide dezamgit Din toate acestea putem deduce trista concluzie c nu putem conta pe aceti oameni ai Societii Naiunilor n nici un fel i c demersul lor, studierea problemei minoritilor nu este mai mult dect o glum proast. Totodat este o nou dovad i a faptului c Societatea Naiunilor nu este altceva dect gruparea de interes a nvingtorilor, care nu poate i nu vrea s fie obiectiv, motiv pentru care nu are ndreptit existena. Cred c paguba care poate fi adus cauzei noastre de ctre romni poate fi echilibrat prin aducerea la cunotina public n locul i momentul corespunztor a demersului lor pe ct de naiv, pe att de unilateral. Din text mai rezult c E. Colban discutase la Budapesta cu ministrul de externe maghiar despre situaia maghiarilor din Romnia. Consulul pare tare suprat pe Societatea Naiunilor, instituie care totui va ajuta Ungaria n depirea crizei economice. Arh. Naionale ale Ungariei, fond Ministerul de Externe, 1923-41 420 p. 13. Constantin Gongopol. 14. Denumire veche a satului Lacu Rou, judeul Harghita. 15. Friedrich Teutsch. 16. Nicolae Blan. 17. Adolf Schullerus. 18. Friedrich Walbaum. 19. Farcas Gyalui. 20. Andrei Balsz. Prezentm cteva ziare, care au relatat cltoria lui Colban: Universul nr. 206 din 5 august 1923; Adevrul nr. 12120 din 2 august, nr. 123 din 5 august, nr. 12129 din 11 august 1923; Patria nr. 166 din 4 august; Viitorul nr. 4623 din 7 august, nr. 4627 din 11 august; nr. 4630 din 15 august 1923; LIndpendance Roumaine nr. 14494, le 13 aot 1923.

2. ERIK COLBAN

RECORD OF JOURNEY IN ROMANIA, MAI 1924

(MINORITIES QUESTIONS, ESPECIALLY SCHOOL QUESTIONS)

I I arrived at Teius, accompanied by Miss Harris as Secretary, in the evening of May 15th 1924. The next morning, M. Jonescu, Director General for Minorities Church questions arrived, and with the train from Bucharest, with which we were to proceed to Cluj, M. Dianu, Assistant Director of the Press Section of the Foreign Ministry. On our arrival at Cluj in the morning of May 16th we were received at the station by M. Sextil Pucariu, who had invited me to come and give lectures at the University. M. Pucariu is one of the Romanian Delegates to the Assembly. II On May 17th 1924, accompanied by M. Jonescu, I called on the Unitarian Bishop in Cluj, M. Ferencz, a very old man (I am told he is 89), with whom I had had a long discussion last year. He received me in the presence of his nearest collaborators, including the Director of the College, in all, six or seven persons. He gave expression to his satisfaction at seeing me again, and was very kind and friendly. I asked the Bishop how matters had developed since I met him last year. He said that as regards purely ecclesiastical questions the position was in general satisfactory. But he could not say the same with regard to school questions. Half an hours discussion and this subject ensued, in which took part the Bishop, the Director of the College and one or two of the other persons present, as well as M. Jonescu and myself. The following were the main points dealt with: The Representatives of the Minorities had been invited to discuss school questions with the Ministry of Public Instruction, but at that time no draft law had bee submitted to them and it had been difficult for them to discuss and express their desires. They had not heard anything about being invited to further discussions. The bill which had recently been prepared for submission to Parliament concerned only State schools, and had not any immediate bearing upon the denominational or private schools. Nevertheless, the bill gave indications as to the intentions of the Government which filled the hearts of the Minorities with fear. The following four points were mentioned: a) Only the State should be entitled to create Kindergartens; b) Only the State should be entitled to create seminars for the training of teachers; c) The bill spoke about State schools and private schools only, thus ignoring altogether the existing denominational schools enjoying public rights; d) There should be elementary schools in the country for 7 years, in the towns for 4 years, after which the children should be transferred to secondary schools. The language of instruction should be that of the Minorities only for the first 4 years, and from the third school year the teaching of the Romanian language should be included as a subject of instruction. After the fourth year, the mother tongue of the Minorities could be taught as a subject of instruction, but, as already stated, the language of instruction would then be Romanian, with the exception of instruction in religion, for which the mother tongue could still be used.

M. Jonescu said that he had not examined the bill as yet and could not enter into any discussion. He would, however, draw the attention of those present to the fact that the State certainly could establish Kindergartens and seminars also in Hungarian, that the fact that there was no mention of denominational schools in the category of private schools did not at all mean that these schools should not be allowed to exist as a special type of private school, and that it still had to be seen what might be the intention of the Government with regard to the conditions on which such schools could be recognized and what would be their legal position. As to point d), M. Jonescu said that this referred only to State schools and did not necessarily prejudice the solution of the problem in private schools. Apart from this, he thought that the provisions of the bill as he had explained them were not unreasonable. The Bishop mentioned as a special instance the situation of the Unitarian congregation at Oradea Mare, where an order had been issued that only the Romanian language should be used for the instruction of the children. M. Jonescu said that there certainly must be some misunderstanding, as no Inspector had any right to give special directions for the Unitarians in Oradea Mare. Only the Minister could issue instructions of this kind, and he certainly had not done so. The reply was that the instruction had been issued in the Ministry, although, if I understood rightly, not by the Minister himself, and that one or two complaints to him had hitherto led to no satisfactory result. The Bishop and the Director followed me down to the hall of the building and there drew my attention to a stone tablet with an inscription in Hungarian. The Director translated it to me and said that it was simply a statement of the fact that the building had been constructed in such and such a year in the reign of such and such Austro-Hungarian Emperor. The Inspector of the Romanian Government had recently objected to this stone, which had been there without anybodys raising any objection all through and since the war. M. Jonescu asked whether the instruction had been given by the Minister and said that the question certainly ought to be arranged. When leaving the College, I said to M. Jonescu that I considered it childish of the Inspector to raise such a question and that I hoped that he would be able to settle it satisfactorily. M. Jonescu said that it was, of course, another case of these hyperRomanian officials, who made a mess of things. III I left for Oradea Mare at 10. 30 in the morning of May 19th. In the train M. Jonescu and I had a conversation about school and church questions. The following is a resum of certain points which I dictated to my secretary in the train, translating into English in M. Jonescus presence what he said in German: We went through the discussion which had taken place on May 17th in the office of M. Ferencz: The Unitarians had said that they had not been invited to discuss the school law, but had recognized that they had been invited to express their desires in this matter. The Representatives of the Minorities had in writing presented their views to the Government, but had not been told what were the decisions of the Government in each case. M. Jonescu felt convinced that when the Government, on the basis of the information in its possession and of the observations made by the Minorities, had prepared the draft law on the private (including the denominational) schools, the Minorities would be given a new opportunity to presenting their views orally before the bill was put in final form. This was, of course, M. Jonescus personal opinion.

Kindergartens: M. Jonescu said that there was nothing in the bill which would prevent the use of the mother tongue in the Kindergartens any more than in the primary schools during the first four school years. It was hardly possible to believe that the Government intended to say that from the age of 6 to 10 the children should be educated say in Hungarian, but from 3 to 6, that is, in the Kindergarten, in Romanian. M. Jonescu also underlined the fact that the Kindergarten is not an obligatory form of instruction. (Compare with this M. Roths declarations to me on May 28th). It does not count as primary instruction. It is voluntary and applies to children for the care of whom it is difficult to arrange, the children, for instance, of industrial laborers. The Kindergarten institution is only an exception and not very much used in practice in Romania. The whole problem has therefore no very great importance. M. Jonescu considered the Kindergarten institution more as a social institution than as part of the educational system of the country. M. Jonescu had not seen in the bill a statement to the effect that only the State should be authorized to create seminars. But if the State decided to reserve to itself the right to create seminars, the obvious consequence would be that seminars would be created also in the Hungarian language, in order to make it possible to have teachers in that language. There already existed Hungarian State seminars, where the language of instruction was Hungarian. As regards the denominational schools, M. Jonescu said that obviously these schools would come under the heading of private schools (Particular-Schulen). Besides creating State schools, the State would authorize the creation, either by the Church or by any private institution, of private schools, in conformity with rules to be established. The bill concerning this question was in preparation. As for the question of the teaching of the Romanian language in the Minorities schools from the fifth year on, M. Jonescu said that not only religion, but also the mother tongue would be taught in that language from the fifth year on, and that during the first four years the whole of the instruction would be given in the mother tongue, with the single exception of the Romanian language, which from the third year on would be taught in Romanian. This rule would be applicable in the country, where there was primary instruction for seven years, and in the towns, where the primary instruction was for four years, after which came secondary instruction. Let us now see, M. Jonescu went on, what was the position during the Hungarian rgime. In Hungary, the Hungarian language was used exclusively as the language of instruction in all State schools, without any exception in favor of any Minority. The mother tongue was not even taught as a subject. In 1907 Count Apponyi decided that even religious instruction should be given only in Hungarian and not in the language of the Minorities. As the Minorities did not submit to this hard rule, a new order was issued in 1909 to the effect that if a priest did not obey and did not give religious instruction in Hungarian, his salary would not be paid (Law of 1909, Article 13). The same law also stipulated that if the reason of the priests refusal to obey was that his ecclesiastical superior had given him orders not to do so, this superior should be told to withdraw these orders. If he did not do so, the payment of the salaries of the whole of the clergy under his direction would be suspended. The same law also provided that only a priest who could speak and write Hungarian should be paid out of State funds. If he did not know the language, he would have to learn it within five years. Where the State undertook to give instruction, the Church, if it wanted to establish a school, had to do so at its own expense. A number of special Church questions are dealt with in a separate paper.

IV On May 20th I received a visit from Professor Kisch, Professor of German language and literature in the University of Cluj. Professor Kisch is a Saxon. He is a gentleman of, I should say, about 60 years of age, very quiet but apparently possessing a strong will. He expressed himself in short cutting phrases. The following are the main points of his replies to my questions: The maintenance of the denominational schools with the right to hold examinations and issue diplomas is a necessity if the religious and cultural life of the Minorities is not to break down. As to the language question in the schools, it would be very difficult if the Romanian language were taught from the third school year on. M. Kisch was of opinion that during the first four years only the mother tongue should be used and taught in the schools. Even if they spoke the mother tongue, the children did not really know it, and they had to be left quiet during the first four schools years so as to be able to learn that language thoroughly, not only so as to know how to speak their dialect, which might perhaps differ quite considerably from the written and literary language, but also to know how to write it and fully understand it. To burden the brains of children at the age of eight with the study of Romanian besides their own language was contrary to good pedagogical principles. After the age of ten that is, after the first four school years it was of secondary interest how things were arranged. He thought, for instance, that four hours of Romanian per week would then be reasonable. Later on, in the State gymnasia and in the University, only Romanian should be used. It was, of course, most desirable that the gymnasia belonging to the Minorities themselves and to their Churches, and established at their own expense, should be allowed to use the mother tongue. Religious instruction ought always to be given in the mother tongue, not only in the elementary schools but also in the gymnasia. So ought instruction in mathematics. This latter for the simple reason that the human brain was not really able, at any rate not without a quite unnecessary effort to count in any other language than the mother tongue. (He was not, of course, speaking about higher mathematics). It was most important that the Minorities schools should be allowed to hold examinations and grant diplomas. The State could, of course, send inspectors or censors to be present during the examinations. To request children of the Minorities coming from private schools and denominational schools to pass an examination, in order to obtain their diplomas, in the State schools and in the Romanian language, would make it very hard for them and considerably handicap them in life. M. Kisch several times emphasized the point that he considered a thorough knowledge of the State language not only a political necessity, but also in the best interests of the Minorities themselves. What he had said about the Minorities schools should not, therefore, be interpreted to indicate any hostility on his part to the Romanian language. He added that he himself, as a Saxon, had not the slightest sympathy for the Hungarian nationalistic ideas. The Hungarians had treated the Saxons so badly that he did not regret the transfer of sovereignty to the Romanian crown. But if Romania wanted the consolidation of the State and a peaceful internal development, she must respect the cultural rights of the Minorities: We will never give up our religion nor our schools. M. Kisch himself is a Lutheran. The Professor further stated that one of the greatest difficulties for his Church and their schools was the financial one. The contribution received from the State was entirely inadequate, and it was necessary to impose very heavy dues on the members of the congregations.

V I left Cluj for Bucharest in the morning of May 21st, in the company of M. Dianu and Catargi, Secretary-General of the Romanian League of Nations Association. VI In the evening of May 22nd, Miss Harris and I dined at the Capa Restaurant as the guests of M. Duca. In addition there were present about 12 persons. I sat next to M. Angelescu, Minister for Public Instruction, and told him about the different points raised by the Unitarian Bishop in Cluj. He said: 1) that he had modified the clause in the draft school law which had stipulated that the State alone should have the right to establish Kindergatens; 2) that he had also modified the provision with regard to the right of the State alone to create seminars: the seminars existing before 1918 would be allowed to go on even if they were private institutions, and those established later (I think he said that they were three in number) would not be allowed to do so. He added that of course the State seminars would give the Minorities every facility and would have special classes for them. 3) the denominational schools: these would be dealt with as private schools. I did not get a clear idea as to whether private schools would be given Offentlichkeitsrecht or not, but received the impression that this might be done. 4) that he had also modified the provision with regard to the teaching of the State language in the Minorities schools: special Commissions on which the Minorities would be represented would decide in each case what would be, from a pedagogical point of view, the right thing. 5) that it would not be honest not to give the Minorities an opportunity of discussing school questions fully with the Government before these questions were submitted to Parliament. M. Angelescu further said that he would give me a copy of the bill concerning State schools (he handed me the copy on the morning of May 23rd), and also of the modifications later introduced in the bill. He also said, if I understood him rightly, that I should have, before leaving Bucharest, a copy of the other bills concerning schools questions which had now been prepared, that is, the bill concerning private schools (including denominational schools) and the bill concerning higher education. (These I did not receive. I am writing to M. Duca about it). VII In the afternoon of May 24th I saw M. Duca. As the school questions he repeated his assurance of last year that the Government would not do anything in order to persecute the Minorities or hurt their interests. Of course, the legitimate interests of the State had to be safeguarded, but when this had been done the most liberal treatment would be given to the Minorities in school matters. M. Angelescu had perhaps sometimes a tendency to go too far in safeguarding the interests of the State, and his colleagues in the Cabinet had sometimes had to interfere in order to tone down his proposals. If, after discussion with M. Angelescu or later on, I had any point to bring up, M. Duca would be most willing to consider it and eventually to use his influence with his colleagues in the Government. As to the general position of the Minorities problem, M. Duca, in the strongest terms, emphasized his desire that the truth should be known. Even if a strong light thrown on some questions might show deficiencies, he did not intend to avoid the light. It was much better to be found lacking in some things and be able to explain and do away with possible

exaggerations and misunderstandings, than to be exposed to the much more dangerous opinion that everything was wrong in Romania. VIII In the afternoon of May 25th I went to a private house to meet M. Maniu, M. VaidaVoevod and M. Popovici, and had a long and very interesting talk with these three gentlemen, all of them belonging to the opposition. M. Maniu said that the lecture he had recently given on the Minorities problem (and which seems to be considered by the Minorities at any rate, the Saxon one as most promising), was more than his personal opinion. It was the program of his party. He hoped that in a few say four months time the Bratiano Government would fall, and that his party (of which he is the leader and candidate for the Premiership) would come into power. The party would make an alliance with the Tsaranists (peasants party) or with any other party belonging to the Opposition which would collaborate with the National Party. The party of the Opposition with which his party would in the last place unite was the party Avaresco-Goga. This party had been in power for a time and had deceived the confidence of the country. M. Maniu further said with regard to the Minorities problem that the Pact of Alba Julia had to be executed, that the bill concerning State schools was entirely unacceptable to his party (he mentioned certain points which coincided with those raised by the Unitarian Bishop in Cluj) and that when it came to be voted on in Parliament, his party would certainly decline to support it and once in power would withdraw the law. He did not deny that the bill contained, of course, a great number of technical stipulations against which nothing could be said, but it had a tendency which was entirely unacceptable. . . M. Vaida-Voevod, the former Prime Minister, then made a long speech, lasting for at least half-an-hour. He entirely let himself go. He attacked the present Government in the most unrestrained language. Not only the Minorities, but very many not to say all Romanians who possessed the necessary qualifications for political or administrative work were kept out of it. It was not true that the Romanian Government could not find good prefects and other administrators. The agrarian reform had been put into execution in a most unsatisfactory way. The Minorities had no more right to complain than the Romanians of Transylvania, who had been treated most unfairly by the Bratiano Government. In schools questions, in questions of access to administrative posts of confidence, the Romanians who did not belong to the Liberal Party (the party of M. Bratiano) were treated as traitors to the country and not as honest Romanian citizens. M. Vaida-Voevod insisted again that the Romanian population of Transylvania were treated by the Bratiano Government more than the Minorities, and had the most serious grievances against that Government. M. Maniu and M. Vaida-Voevod himself had been Hungarian citizens and had suffered sufficiently from the bad treatment imposed on them by the Hungarian Government to see how utterly foolish and inefficient it was now to treat the Minorities as did the Bratiano Government. Nothing was more unreasonable than to believe that to force the Magyars, Jews, etc. to speak Romanian was the way to make them good Romanian citizens: on the contrary, it would only make them more dangerous. It would make them more able to fight the Romanian nation, but it would no more alter their disposition of hate than any artificial means could make a man out of a woman. IX

In the morning of May 26th, M. Angelescu, accompanied by the Directeur de lEnseignement normal-primaire in the Ministry of Public Instruction, came to take me for a motor drive to see different Romanian schools. During the day I had a number of short talks with M. Angelescu. The following is a resum of his more important remarks: One of his troubles had been that the Minorities schools had not paid reasonable attention to the new Government. In very many cases they had gone on as if the Romanian Government did not exist at all, had organized and re-organized their services as it suited them, issued diplomas and committed serious abuses. In such cases it had been necessary for the Government to intervene strongly. One, and even two warnings had been given to the schools, and if they were without effect, the schools had, in some cases, been closed. When the direction of the schools finally submitted and accepted the instructions of the Ministry, the schools were re-opened. The closing of a school was therefore not a punishment, but only a disciplinary measure, a means of compulsion in order to obtain obedience towards the Government. As an example of abuse, M. Angelescu mentioned that serious complaints had reached the Government to the effect that whereas previously the Romanian maturity certificate had been acceptable, some students holding these certificates did not now possess the necessary knowledge. It had even happened that students with certificates from Minorities schools did not even know how to read and write. The decision that denominational schools should not be entitled to receive pupils of other denominations was aimed at the Jews, who had been magyarised. M. Angelescu had not found it possible to allow the Hungarian propaganda carried on by these Jews and had issued a general order. Exceptions were, however, willingly made in favor of other than Jewish denominational schools. Another ministerial decree prevented the co-education of boys and girls above a certain low age. It had been found quite necessary to issue this order, as scandalous cases had been brought before the Ministry. Conditions in Romania were not such as to allow boys and girls to be educated together. The Minister did not give me any examples, but mentioned that in the denominational schools some serious abuses on the part of the teachers towards the children had occurred. The policy of the Romanian Government towards its Minorities was much more liberal than that of certain neighboring countries. As far as the school laws were concerned, M. Angelescu restricted himself to a general reference to the modifications and the text of the proposals now before Parliament. He again promised to let me have the draft law concerning the private schools, which had not yet been submitted to the Cabinet. X In the morning of May 27th I went to see M. Tatarescu, at the office of the Prime Minister. I quote the main points of what M. Tatarescu told me: He is the Under-Secretary of State for political questions, including Minorities questions. As these later are of particular importance, he is generally called Under-Secretary for, or Minister for, Minorities questions. He was appointed to this post in December last, and has now organized his office, in which three Hungarians and two German-Saxons or Schwabes are working. He is directly under the Minister of the Interior, but also has direct relations with the Ministry for Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Public Worship and the Ministry of Public Instruction, and with any other Ministry, when this is found desirable or convenient. He

intends to attach to the Prefects in some prefectures where Minorities problems are of particular importance, an official under his direction to deal with Minorities questions in the first instance, receive complaints and try to settle points of difference. In this way there will be an elaborate scheme for treating these problems, and the Minorities would, he hoped, appreciate and use it. The great difficulty was the psychological one, the atmosphere created before and during the war and the unwillingness of the Minorities leaders to come to terms. Some short time ago he had had a meeting with some of these leaders and frankly told them that if they continued to work against a reasonable settlement, he would get into direct touch with the subordinate priests and with the peasants, and in general with the masses of the population belonging to the Minorities. The result had been that the leaders had taken the matter seriously and it might be that a thorough re-organization of the leadership of the Minorities in Transylvania would take place, perhaps within a few days. As for the administrative difficulties, M. Tatarescu said that he had already taken steps to replace three or four Prefects who had shown administrative deficiencies. The views of the Minister of Public Instruction were considerably different from M. Tatarescus own: M. Angelescu looked upon the school questions solely from the standpoint of a Minister of Public Instruction of Greater Romania, anxious that the nation should have the best possible instruction from the Romanian point of view. M. Tatarescu had made a point of seeing that the general political interests of the country at large were safeguarded, and it was most important than the Minorities should be satisfied. For this reason, he had not only, as M. Duca had said to me, poured water into M. Angelescus wine, but he had done it in very liberal fashion. Amendments had been made in the State schools bill, but M. Tatarescu had, however, not obtained everything for which he had fought. As for the bill on private (including denominational) schools, this was not yet ready for submission to Parliament. The copy which M. Angelescu had promised to send me would, I could be quite sure, be very considerably altered. The denominational schools: the Romanian Government was of opinion that the schools should in principle be non-confessional. The Minorities held the quite different view that public instruction should be linked up with the Churches. Here was the really great difficulty, quite opposite views on a question of principle: the Romanian Government did not want denominational schools at all in the country. The Minorities considered them essential. M. Tatarescu did not say expressly that denominational schools would be allowed or not allowed, but he gave me to understand that if they were allowed, it would be as the result of a concession made in order to satisfy the Minorities even against the conviction of the Government. We discussed the language question: I explained the opinion of M. Kisch that the first four years should be left to the children thoroughly to learn their mother tongue, to speak it, write it, and know it from a literary point of view. M. Tatarescu said that he knew all the arguments in favor of M. Kischs opinion. There were, however, arguments on the other side, which seemed to show, especially, that the children could quite well master more than one language at the same time. He assured me that there was not the slightest intention of preventing the Minorities from educating their children in their own language, but it was in the interests of the Minorities themselves for their children to have a thorough knowledge of the State language. It was therefore necessary for them to begin quite early.

Administrative language: for the present no clear rules existed and conditions in the different localities differed very much. In Brashov, for instance, only German was used for public notices and in the Mairie while in some thoroughly Hungarian village only Romanian was used. The one was just as wrong as the other, and it would be necessary to issue some general rules. These, it was M. Tatarescus intention, to issue by administrative decree, in order to avoid their submission to Parliament, where the liberal regulations he had in view might meet with considerable opposition. The idea was that to permit in towns, villages or prefectures where the Minorities language in the administration should be permitted. The Minorities themselves went further and wanted the Minorities languages to be used throughout the whole of the administration. That was rather a stiff demand. Municipal autonomy: the bill on the unification of the administration drawn up last year was very liberal and gave the municipalities a great measure of autonomy. It was therefore to be expected that it would not be passed by Parliament in its present form, as this would result, in certain localities, in the Mayor and the whole of the Municipal Council being composed of persons belonging to a Minority, a situation which might make administrative collaboration with the Government a little difficult. It was suggested that a certain number, for instance four or five, of the heads of the local administrative services, who, in many cases, were Romanian, should sit and vote on the Councils as members without being elected. As the number of members on the Councils would be between 9 and 50, there would be no danger of these officials creating a majority or even a very considerable element in those bodies. It had, however, been objected that this idea was anti-democratic, and the proposal made that these officials ought only to sit on the town and village Councils in an advisory capacity. The question was not yet finally settled. Language in Court: this was a question which M. Tatarescu himself had as yet little dealt with. It was in the hands of the Minister of Justice. The fundamental principle was that the language in Court was Romanian, but that reasonable facilities should be given to the Minorities in order that they might not suffer from the lack of knowledge of the Romanian language. In many places the Minorities language was, as a matter of fact, used in the Courts to a considerable extent. This, however, represented rather a concession of fact than the recognition by the Romanian Government of the right of such a practice. Definitive rules had not yet been drawn up and the problem was very difficult. Local abuses and smaller conflicts with the Minorities: M. Tatarescu had prepared a scheme for the creation of a museum for Hungarian national symbols, statues, inscriptions, etc., of which very many had been taken down by the Romanians during the troubled period after the Armistice. He did not expressly say that the intention was also to put the Hungarian statues and symbols not yet touched in the museum. Nevertheless, I think it may perhaps have been in his mind that where these questions are the source of trouble, friction might be avoided if the symbols were collected in a place which could be kept and guarded as a national sanctuary of the Minorities. XI In the afternoon of May 27th I went with M. Dianu to the Senate, where I saw MM. Teutsch and Schullerus (I was told that M. Nagy, the Reformed Bishop of Cluj, was not in town). The two gentlemen received me in a very friendly way. I asked them about the present position and about their questions with the Government, and was told that at the moment

attention was concentrated upon the school law now before Parliament. The two gentlemen had just received the bill with the amendments proposed by the Parliamentary Committee. They were aware of the fact that on certain points their wishes had been met. Two points of overwhelming importance nevertheless remained, on which satisfaction had not been given: one concerned Article 7 of the bill dealing with the Minorities language in the schools, the other the financial position of the denominational schools. M. Dianu said to me afterwards that he was struck by the moderate way in which MM. Teutsch and Schullerus had discussed. I then went to the Chamber, where I met M. Tatarescu, to whom I briefly described my conversation with M. Teutsch and Schullerus. M. Tatarescu said that he knew all about their questions, and he could assure me that he had fought to obtain the best possible conditions. XII I then went to see the Under Secretary of State for Agriculture and State Domains, M. Cipianu. I had been addressed to him by M. Duca, in order to get more detailed information concerning the agrarian reform, and, in particular, concerning the distribution of the expropriated land. M. Cipianu confirmed the declarations made to me a few days previously by M. Constantinescu, and said that he was just preparing detailed statistics showing the distribution of expropriated land according to nationality and districts. He would send me these figures in the very near future, say no later than in 4 weeks time. M. Cipianu also said that the agrarian reform was now nearly completed. In about three years time the peasants would not only be in possession of their farms, which was already a situation of fact, but their titles would also be in due and final form. XIII On May 28th I received at the hotel Dr. Hans Otto Roth, a Deputy, and according to his visiting card, President of the German Parliamentary Party in Greater Romania. Dr. Roth, who is a comparatively young man he is hardly more than 40 began by saying that he did not come as a querulant. He came as I had asked to see him in the Chamber the previous day, and he would be most willing to give me any information I would like to have. The following is a resum of what he said: The German Party had at the moment 5 Senators and 10 Deputies: M. Manius party 29 Deputies, M. Jorgas 17, General Averescu Gogas 6, and there was 1 Social Democrat. Finally, the Tsaranistes had 34, and they were now making an alliance with M. Manius group (the Nationalists). As the total number of Deputies was about 400, the Opposition had no proper representation at all. The big problem of the moment was the State school law now before Parliament: the German Party did not ask for unreasonable concessions, but they felt that the Treaty for Minorities protection had to be executed. That Treaty did not give more than the very minimum necessary and some articles of the bill were clearly contrary to the Minorities Treaty: Article 7 of the bill, concerning the Minorities language in schools, contained a number of stipulations which were clearly contrary to the clauses of the Minorities Treaty: the primary schools covered 7 years, not only 4, and the Minorities language ought therefore to be taught throughout the whole 7 years. All Romanian citizens were obliged to go through at least these 7 years, and it was therefore a false construction to consider the 3 last years as secondary instruction. The article further said that the Ministry could, and not that it should or must, create Minorities schools. Furthermore no indication was given as to the considerable proportion of Minorities contemplated by the Treaty. Nor was there any

indication as to the extent of the district to which the rule should apply. Moreover, the word steroglote did not cover the most common case, namely a mixed population, but applied only, strictly speaking, to districts where the whole of the population consisted of Minorities. Again, the word studiul in the second paragraph, and the word obiecte in the third paragraph might be read to mean that the Romanian language should, even in the first 4 years, not be a subject of instruction, but the language of instruction. Generally, the whole article contained full powers for the Minister of Public Instruction to do what he liked. It gave the Minorities no guarantee, but clearly showed that their position would be very bad and unsatisfactory. As for the Kindergartens, Dr. Roth said that the trouble was that the intention of the Government seemed to be to impose the Romanian language in the State Kindergartens, although an amendment had been introduced to the effect that the Minorities were free to create private Kindergartens. It was a mistake to suppose that the Kindergartens were not compulsory. Given existing conditions, they were compulsory. (I have not yet been able to study the text of the law closely, but this is in direct opposition to what M. Jonescu thought would be reasonable). In addition to the question of Article 7 and the Kindergartens, Dr. Roth mentioned the question of the financing of the State schools. Under the bill, all the expenses of the schools, with the sole exception of the salaries of the teachers, were to be borne by the municipalities. This would mean that the Minorities who established denominational or private schools would have not only to pay for their own schools, but also to contribute towards the upkeep of the State schools of the Romanian majority. As the Minorities still were Dr. Roth added with a somewhat bitter smile the richer people in the country, they would have to pay something like 95% of the expenses of the Romanian State schools, and 100% of the expenses of their own denominational or private schools. This Dr. Roth considered contrary to the Minorities Treaty. As to the Ecoles normales, Dr Roth said that the bill had been modified so as to leave the question to some extent open. It was, he added, very difficult for the Minorities to judge the stipulations of the State schools bill as long as they had not before them M. Angelescus draft for the private and denominational schools. The two laws formed an indivisible whole. Dr. Roth finally mentioned some instances of what he considered to be grave abuses towards the German Minority: at Santa Ana, a Romanian State school had been opened, although the whole of the population of the town was Schwabe. There were, he thought, only 2 individuals of Romanian race. The result was that the children had to come from the district all round to go to school in this absolutely German town, and the expenses of the school, with the single exception of the salaries of the teachers, would, under the bill, be charged to the German municipality. At the same time the Government had refused to allow the setting up of a Kindergarten with German language at Santa Ana. at Arbore (in Bukovina), the Ministry had created such a situation that the children of German race had to walk 12 kilometers to school. XIV In the afternoon of May 28th I called on M. Duca at the Foreign Ministry. He was very busy, and our conversation did not last very long.

I mentioned the Minorities problem. I said that I did not want to go into details then, but would like to submit the question as to whether it was wise policy to make the Saxons and the Schwabes, the Germans of Romania, the enemies of the Government. I could understand that M. Angelescu hesitated to adopt a thoroughly conciliatory attitude towards the Hungarians, but certainly the Germans were no danger to the consolidation of the Kingdom. Much more were they a most valuable element of the population, as also were, by the way, most of the Hungarians. Would it not be wise policy for the Government to modify the bill on the State schools as to enable the German Minority to vote for it? Of course, there could be only one law for all the minorities. But surely it should be possible to make the law so as to win over the German one. I would put this as an internal political question and submit it as such to M. Ducas consideration, feeling convinced that this aspect of the case would be sufficient to find a solution which would be satisfactory also from the point of view of Minorities protection. M. Duca seemed to find the suggestion admirable, and said that I could feel sure that the bill would still have to get a lot of water before it was passed by Parliament. He would take up the question with the Cabinet and see what could be done. As I expressed some doubt as to what might be the attitude of M. Angelescu, whom I should have no opportunity of seeing again before I left Bucharest, M. Duca said that I could trust him to settle that. When I left, M. Duca said that he would be prevented from seeing me the same evening at the dinner to be given for us by M. Vintila Bratiano and M. Lapedatu, but that he hoped to see me again in the autumn. I had promised him to go to the Dobruja and to Bessarabia, and he was anxious that I should keep my promise. I said that I should, in all probability, be going to Angora and Athens in October and that it would perhaps then be possible to go also to Romania. E. C. 30/5/24 ASDN, 41/36423/1481
See also: Arhiva Ministerului de externe a Romniei, Fond Geneva, vol. III.

2. ERIK COLBAN

RELATARE ASUPRA C L TORIEI N ROMNIA, MAI 1924

(CHESTIUNI PRIVIND MINORIT ILE, N SPECIAL CHESTIUNI COLARE)

I Am ajuns la Teiu, nsoit de dra Harris1 ca i secretar, n seara zilei de 15 mai 1924. n urmtoarea diminea a sosit dl. Ionescu, director general pe problemele bisericilor minoritilor, iar cu trenul de la Bucureti, cu care trebuia s plecm la Cluj, /a venit/ dl. Dianu, director adjunct al Seciei de pres a Ministerului de Externe.

La sosirea noastr n Cluj, pe 16 mai dimineaa, am fost ntmpinai la gar de dl. Sextil Pucariu, cel care m invitase s vin i s in conferine la Universitate. Dl. Pucariu este unul dintre delegaii romni la Adunare2. II n 17 mai, nsoit de dl. Ionescu, l-am vizitat la Cluj pe episcopul unitarian, dl. Ferencz3, un om foarte btrn (mi s-a spus c are 89 de ani), cu care purtasem anul trecut o ndelungat discuie. M-a primit n prezena celor mai apropiai colaboratori ai si, inclusiv a directorului Colegiului, n total ase ori apte persoane. i-a exprimat satisfacia de a m revedea, i a fost foarte amabil i prietenos. L-am ntrebat pe episcop cum au decurs lucrurile de la ntrevederea noastr de anul trecut. A spus c n ceea ce privete chestiunile pur ecleziastice situaia este n general mulumitoare. Dar nu poate spune acelai lucru cu privire la chestiunile colare. A urmat o discuie de o jumtate de or pe aceast tem, la care au participat episcopul, directorul Colegiului i una sau dou dintre persoanele prezente, ca i dl. Ionescu i cu mine. S-au atins urmtoarele puncte principale: Reprezentanii minoritilor fuseser invitai s dezbat chestiunile colare cu Ministerul Instruciunii Publice, dar la vremea aceea nu li s-a supus ateniei nici un proiect de lege, i de aceea a fost dificil pentru ei s discute i s-i exprime dorinele. Nu tiau nimic despre vreo invitaie la discuii ulterioare4. Proiectul de lege recent pregtit5 pentru a fi naintat Parlamentului vizeaz numai colile de stat, i nu are o importan imediat pentru colile confesionale ori private. Cu toate acestea, proiectul aduce la iveal inteniile Guvernului, care umplu de team inimile minoritilor. Au fost menionate urmtoarele patru puncte: a) Numai statul s aib dreptul de a ntemeia grdinie; b) Numai statul s aib dreptul de a crea seminarii pedagogice; c) Proiectul vorbete numai despre coli de stat i private, ignornd astfel colile confesionale care se bucur de drepturi publice; d) Urmeaz s existe coli elementare de 7 ani la ar, de 4 ani la ora, dup care copiii vor fi transferai la coli secundare. Limba de instrucie va fi cea a minoritilor numai n primii 4 ani, iar din al treilea an de nvmnt limba romn va fi inclus ca materie de studiu. ncepnd cu cel de-al patrulea an, limba matern a minoritilor va putea fi predat ca subiect de studiu, dar, cum s-a spus deja, limba de instrucie va fi cea romn, cu excepia nvmntului religios, care se va putea folosi n continuare de limba matern. Dl. Ionescu a spus c nu a examinat nc proiectul i nu s-ar putea lansa ntr-o discuie. Totui, a atras atenia celor de fa asupra faptului c, n mod sigur, statul va crea grdinie i seminarii pedagogice n maghiar, iar lipsa vreunei menionri a colilor confesionale n cadrul categoriei colilor private nu nseamn c acestora nu li se va mai permite s funcioneze ca tipuri speciale ale colilor private, i c nc rmne de vzut care este intenia Guvernului cu privire la condiiile n care vor fi recunoscute asemenea coli i care va fi statutul lor legal6. Dl. Ionescu a spus c punctul d) se refer doar la colile de stat, i nu va aduce n mod necesar prejudicii soluionrii problemei colilor private. Dincolo de toate acestea, el consider c prevederile proiectului de lege, aa cum tocmai a explicat, nu sunt nerezonabile. Ca situaie special episcopul a menionat cazul congregaiei unitariene din Oradea Mare, unde se dduse ordin ca pentru instrucia copiilor s fie folosit numai limba romn. Dl.

Ionescu a spus c aici exist cu certitudine o nenelegere, deoarece nici un inspector nu are dreptul de a emite direciuni speciale pentru unitarienii din Oradea Mare. Doar ministrul poate emite instruciuni de acest gen, iar ministrul cu siguran nu le-a emis. Replica a fost c instruciunea fusese emis de Minister, dei, dac am neles corect, nu de ctre ministrul nsui, i c una sau dou plngeri adresate acestuia nu au condus la nici un rezultat mulumitor. Episcopul i directorul m-au urmat pn jos n holul cldirii, atrgndu-mi atenia asupra unei plci de piatr cu o inscripie n maghiar. Directorul mi-a tradus-o i a spus c ea atest faptul c aceast cldire a fost construit n anul cutare, sub domnia cutrui mprat austro-ungar. Inspectorul Guvernului romn obiectase recent fa de aceast plac, care sttuse acolo n timpul rzboiului fr s fac obiectul disputei nimnui. Dl. Ionescu a ntrebat dac instruciunea fusese emis de ministru i a spus c, n mod cert, problema trebuie rezolvat. Cnd am prsit Colegiul, i-am spus dl. Ionescu c mie mi se pare infantil din partea inspectorului s ridice o asemenea chestiune i c sper c el va reui s-o rezolve n chip mulumitor. Dl. Ionescu a spus c este vorba, firete, despre nc un caz de funcionar hiper-romn, care ncurc lucrurile. III Am plecat spre Oradea Mare la ora 10. 30 n dimineaa zilei de 19 mai. Pe tren dl. Ionescu i cu mine am conversat pe teme colare i bisericeti. Redau n rezumat anumite puncte pe care le-am dictat secretarei mele pe tren, traducnd n englez, n prezena dl. Ionescu, ceea ce el spunea n german: Am dezbtut discuia purtat pe 17 mai n biroul dl. Ferencz. Unitarienii spuseser c nu fuseser invitai s discute legea colar, dar recunoscuser c fuseser invitai s-i exprime dorinele n aceast problem. Reprezentanii minoritilor i prezentaser Guvernului n scris vederile lor, dar nu li se comunicaser deciziile Guvernului n fiecare caz n parte. Dl. Ionescu era sigur c atunci cnd, pe baza informaiilor deinute i a observaiilor fcute de minoritile nsele, Guvernul va pregti proiectul de lege asupra colilor private (inclusiv a celor confesionale), minoritilor li se va acorda nc un prilej de a-i prezenta vederile oral mai nainte de a se da proiectului forma final. Aceasta era, desigur, opinia personal a dl. Ionescu. Grdinie: Dl. Ionescu a spus c n proiect nu exist nimic care s interzic utilizarea limbii materne nici n grdinie, nici n colile primare n primii patru ani de coal. Este greu de crezut c Guvernul intenioneaz s spun c de la 6 la 10 ani copiii trebuie educai n maghiar, dar de la 3 la 6 ani, adic la grdini, n romn. Dl. Ionescu a mai subliniat faptul c grdinia nu este o form de instrucie obligatorie. (Vezi pentru comparaie declaraiile pe care mi le-a fcut dl. Roth la 28 mai.) Ea nu se socotete ca instrucie primar. Este voluntar i se aplic copiilor crora nu li se poate asigura ngrijire, de exemplu copiilor muncitorilor din industrie. Instituia grdiniei este o excepie nu foarte rspndit n Romnia. Prin urmare ntreaga problem nu are o foarte mare importan. Dl. Ionescu consider instituia grdiniei mai mult ca o instituie social, dect ca parte constitutiv a sistemului educaional din ar. Dl. Ionescu nu a vzut n proiectul de lege vreo aseriune cu privire la faptul c numai statul ar fi autorizat s nfiineze seminarii. Dar dac statul i va rezerva siei dreptul de a crea seminarii, consecina evident ar fi aceea c vor fi nfiinate seminarii i n limba maghiar, pentru a pregti nvtori n aceast limb. Deja exist seminarii maghiare de stat, n care limba de predare este cea maghiar.

Ct privete colile confesionale, dl. Ionescu a spus c este evident c aceste coli vor intra sub patronajul colilor private (Particular- Schulen). Pe lng nfiinarea de coli de stat, statul va autoriza, n conformitate cu regulile ce urmeaz a fi stabilite, nfiinarea de coli private fie de ctre Biseric, fie de ctre instituii private. Proiectul de lege cu privire la aceast chestiune se afl n pregtire. Ct despre problema predrii limbii romne n colile minoritilor ncepnd cu clasa a cincea, dl. Ionescu a spus c nu numai religia, ci i limba matern va fi predat n acea limb din anul al cincilea, i c n cursul primilor patru ani de coal ntreaga instrucie se va face n limba matern, cu unica excepie a predrii limbii romne, care va fi predat n romnete din clasa a treia. Aceast regul se va aplica la ar, unde instrucia primar cuprinde apte ani, i la ora, unde instrucia primar dureaz patru ani, dup care urmeaz instrucia secundar. S vedem acum, a continuat dl. Ionescu, care a fost situaia pe vremea regimului maghiar. n Ungaria limba maghiar a fost exclusiv utilizat ca limb de instrucie n toate colile de stat, fr nici o excepie, n defavoarea oricrei minoriti. La 1907 contele Apponyi a decis ca nsi instrucia religiei s se fac n maghiar, i nu n limba minoritilor. ntruct minoritile nu s-au supus acestei legi aspre, n 1909 a fost emis un nou ordin conform cruia, dac un preot nu respecta legea i nu preda nvmntul religiei n maghiar, nu era pltit (legea din 1909, articolul 13). Aceeai lege mai stipula c dac motivul invocat de preot pentru a refuza era acela c superiorul su i poruncise s fac astfel, superiorului trebuia s i se cear s-i retrag ordinul. Dac nu i-l retrgea, se suspendau salariile tuturor clericilor aflai n subordinea lui. Aceeai lege mai prevedea c numai acei preoi care tiau s scrie i s citeasc n limba maghiar urmau a fi remunerai din fondul de stat. Dac nu cunoteau limba, erau obligai s-o nvee n rstimp de cinci ani. Dac acolo unde statul dorea s acorde instrucie, dac vreo biseric ar fi vrut s nfiineze o coal, ar fi putut s-o fac pe cheltuial proprie. Cteva chestiuni bisericeti speciale sunt tratate ntr-un act separat. IV Pe data de 20 mai am primit vizita profesorului Kisch, profesor de limba i literatura german la Universitatea din Cluj. Profesorul Kisch este sas. Este un domn de aproximativ 60 de ani, foarte linitit dar aparent nzestrat cu o voin puternic. Vorbete n propoziii scurte i tioase. Cele de mai jos constituie replicile lui la ntrebrile puse de mine. Meninerea colilor confesionale cu dreptul de a organiza examene i de a acorda diplome este o necesitate, dac nu se dorete prbuirea vieii religioase i culturale a minoritilor. Ct despre chestiunea limbii n coli, ar fi foarte dificil dac limba romn ar fi predat din clasa a treia. Prerea dl. Kisch era aceea c n timpul primilor patru ani de coal ar trebui folosit i predat n coli numai limba matern. Chiar dac vorbesc deja limba matern, copiii nc nu o cunosc cu adevrat, i ar trebui lsai s-o nvee n linite n timpul primilor patru ani de coal, pentru a i-o putea nsui temeinic, nu numai pentru a fi n stare s-i vorbeasc dialectul, care probabil difer considerabil de limba scris i literar, i, de asemenea, pentru a ti s scrie i s neleag deplin limba matern. Este contrar principiilor pedagogice s ncarci creierul copiilor de la vrsta de opt ani cu studiul limbii romne pe lng cel al propriei lor limbi. Dup vrsta de zece ani adic dup primii patru ani de coal este de interes secundar cum se rezolv lucrurile. El se gndea, de pild, c patru ore de limba romn pe sptmn ar fi rezonabil. Ulterior, n gimnaziile de stat i la universitate, ar trebui folosit numai romna. Este, firete, dezirabil ca gimnaziilor aparinnd minoritilor i bisericilor acestora, nfiinate de ctre acestea pe cheltuiala lor, s li se permit folosirea limbii materne.

Predarea religiei ar trebui ntotdeauna s se fac n limba matern, nu numai n colile elementare, ci i n gimnazii. La fel ar trebui s se predea matematica, i aceasta din urm pentru simplul motiv c creierul omenesc nu este n stare n orice caz nu fr un efort inutil s numere n nici o alt limb dect cea matern. (El nu vorbea, desigur, despre matematici superioare.) Este de maxim importan s se permit colilor minoritilor s organizeze examene i s garanteze diplome. Firete, statul ar putea trimite inspectori sau cenzori care s ia parte la examene. A le cere copiilor minoritarilor provenii din coli private i confesionale s treac un examen, pentru a obine o diplom, n coli de stat i n limba romn le-ar ngreuna situaia i ar constitui pentru ei un handicap considerabil n via. n mai multe rnduri dl. Kisch a evideniat faptul c el consider cunoaterea temeinic a limbii de stat nu numai ca o necesitate politic, dar ca fiind n propriul interes al minoritilor nsele. Ceea ce el a spus despre colile minoritilor nu trebuie, de aceea, s fie interpretat ca semn al vreunei ostiliti dinspre partea sa fa de limba romn. A adugat c el nsui, ca sas, nu are nici cea mai vag simpatie fa de ideile naionaliste ungare. Maghiarii i trataser pe sai att de ru nct el nu regreta transferul de suveranitate asupra coroanei romne. Dar dac Romnia dorete consolidarea statului i o dezvoltare intern panic, ea trebuie s respecte drepturile culturale ale minoritilor: Noi nu ne vom prsi nici religia, nici colile noastre. Dl. Kisch este luteran. Apoi profesorul a mai spus c problema financiar reprezint una din cele mai dificile ale bisericii sale i colilor sale. Contribuia primit de la stat este total inadecvat, i prin urmare este necesar ca membrii congregaiilor s fie mpovrai cu impozite foarte grele. V Am plecat din Cluj n direcia Bucureti n dimineaa de 21 mai, n compania dl. Dianu i a domnului Catargi7, secretar-general al Ligii romne la Asociaia Naiunilor. VI n seara de 22 mai, dra Harris i cu mine am luat cina la restaurantul Capa, ca invitai ai dl. Duca. Au mai participat nc circa 12 persoane. Eu am ezut lng dl. Angelescu, ministrul Instruciunii Publice, i i-am vorbit despre diferitele puncte dezbtute de episcopul unitarian din Cluj. El mi-a rspuns: 1) c a modificat acea clauz a proiectului de lege colar care stipula c numai statul are dreptul s nfiineze grdinie; 2) c a modificat, de asemenea, prevederea cu privire la dreptul exclusiv al statului de a nfiina seminarii /pedagogice/ astfel: seminariile care exist de dinainte de 1918 i vor continua activitatea chiar dac sunt instituii private, iar celor nfiinate mai trziu (cred c a spus c sunt trei la numr) nu li se va permite aceasta. A adugat c, desigur, seminariile de stat vor acorda minoritilor toate facilitile i vor avea pentru ele clase speciale. 3) colile confesionale: acestea vor fi considerate ca coli private. Nu mi-am fcut o idee prea clar dac colilor private li se va acorda sau nu ffentlichkeitsrecht8, dar am impresia c da. 4) c a modificat i prevederea cu privire la predarea limbii de stat n colile minoritilor: anumite comisii speciale, n care vor fi reprezentate i minoritile, vor decide de la caz la caz ceea ce este corect de ntreprins din punct de vedere pedagogic. 5) c nu ar fi onest s nu se dea minoritilor ocazia de a discuta chestiunile colare cu Guvernul mai nainte de a se supune Parlamentului aceste chestiuni.

Dl. Angelescu a mai spus c mi va da o copie a proiectului de lege privind colile de stat (mi-a nmnat copia n dimineaa de 23 mai), ca i a modificrilor ulterioare ale proiectului. A mai spus, dac l-am neles bine, c nainte de a pleca din Bucureti voi primi o copie a tuturor celorlalte proiecte de legi pe probleme colare, aflate acum n pregtire, respectiv a proiectului asupra colilor private (inclusiv a colilor confesionale) i a celui asupra nvmntului superior. (Nu am primit aceste copii. i voi scrie dl. Duca despre aceasta.) VII n dup-masa de 24 mai l-am vzut pe dl. Duca. Vizavi de problemele colare, i-a repetat asigurarea de anul trecut, c Guvernul nu va persecuta minoritile i nu le va leza interesele. Desigur, trebuie salvgardate interesele legitime ale statului, dar dup atingerea acestui obiectiv minoritilor li se va acorda cel mai liberal tratament n chestiuni colare. Poate uneori dl. Angelescu vdete tendina de a merge prea departe cu salvgardarea intereselor statului, i de aceea uneori colegii lui de cabinet trebuie s intervin pentru a-i tempera propunerile9. Dac, n urma unor viitoare discuii pe care le voi purta cu dl. Angelescu, voi avea de fcut vreo sugestie, dl. Duca s-a artat foarte disponibil n acest sens, eventual chiar pentru a face uz de influena sa asupra colegilor din Guvern. n ceea ce privete situaia general a problemei minoritilor, dl. Duca i-a subliniat n cei mai limpezi termeni dorina ca s cunosc adevrul. Chiar dac lumina puternic proiectat asupra unor chestiuni ar scoate la iveal deficiene, el nu intenioneaz s evite aceast lumin. Este mult mai bine s descoperi lipsuri n unele lucruri i s fii capabil s explici i nlturi posibilele exagerri i nenelegeri, dect s te expui opiniei i mai periculoase c n Romnia totul este ru. VIII n dup-masa zilei de 25 mai am mers ntr-o cas particular pentru a m ntlni cu dl. Maniu, dl. Vaida-Voevod i dl. Popovici10. Cu aceti trei domni, cu toii aparinnd opoziiei, am purtat o lung i foarte interesant discuie. Dl. Maniu a spus c acea conferin pe care a inut-o recent asupra problemei minoritilor (i care pare a fi considerat de minoriti sau n orice caz de ctre cea sseasc drept cea mai promitoare)11 exprim mai mult dect opinia lui personal. Reprezint programul partidului su. Spera c n cteva luni s zicem n patru luni Guvernul Brtianu va cdea, i atunci va veni la putere partidul su (al crui conductor i candidat la postul de prim-ministru este)12. Partidul su va face o alian cu rnitii (Partidul rnesc) sau cu orice alt partid din opoziie care va colabora cu Partidul Naional13. Numai n ultim instan partidul su se va uni cu un alt partid al opoziiei, Partidul Averescu-Goga. Acesta fusese la putere pentru un timp i nelase ncrederea rii14. Dl. Maniu a mai spus cu privire la problema minoritilor c Pactul [Hotrrea de Unire] de la Alba Iulia trebuia aplicat, c proiectul de lege privitor la colile de stat este totalmente inacceptabil pentru partidul su (a menionat cteva puncte care coincideau cu cele enunate de episcopul unitarian din Cluj) i c atunci cnd se va ajunge la votarea lui n Parlament, cu certitudine partidul su i va declina orice suport i odat ajuns la putere va revoca legea. Nu a negat faptul c proiectul conine, firete, un mare numr de stipulaii tehnice mpotriva crora nu este nimic de comentat, dar per ansamblu tendina sa este inacceptabil...

Dl. Vaida-Voevod, fostul prim-ministru15, a inut apoi o lung cuvntare, care a durat cel puin o jumtate de or. i-a dat drumul complet. A atacat actualul Guvern n termenii cei mai nestpnii16. Nu numai minoritile, ci foarte muli ca s nu spunem toi romnii care posedau calificarea necesar muncii politice sau administrative erau inui deoparte. Nu este adevrat c Guvernul romn nu poate gsi prefeci i ali administratori buni. Reforma agrar a fost aplicat n modul cel mai nesatisfctor. Minoritile nu au dreptul s se plng mai mult dect romnii din Transilvania, care au fost tratai ct se poate de incorect de ctre Guvernul Brtianu. n chestiunile colare, n chestiunea accesului la posturi administrative de ncredere, romnii care nu aparineau Partidului Liberal (partidul dl. Brtianu) erau tratai ca trdtori de ar i ca ceteni romni neloiali. Dl. Vaida-Voevod a insistat din nou asupra faptului c populaia romneasc din Transilvania este tratat de Guvernul Brtianu mai ru dect minoritile, i c are cele mai serioase plngeri mpotriva Guvernului. Dl. Maniu i dl. Vaida-Voevod, care ei nii fuseser ceteni maghiari i suferiser ndestul n urma modului n care fuseser tratai de ctre Guvernul maghiar, vedeau acum ct de complet prostete i ineficient sunt tratate minoritile de ctre Guvernul Brtianu. Nimic nu este mai puin nelept dect s crezi c a-i fora pe unguri, evrei etc. s vorbeasc romnete este modalitatea potrivit de a-i transforma n buni ceteni romni; din contr, aceasta i-ar face doar mai periculoi. I-ar ndrji s lupte mpotriva naiunii romne, dar nu le-ar modifica dispoziia de ur, tot la fel cum nici un mijloc artificial nu ar putea face dintr-o femeie brbat. IX n dimineaa de 26 mai, dl. Angelescu, nsoit de Directeur de lEnseignement normal-primaire al Ministerului Instruciunii Publice, a venit s m ia ntr-o excursie motorizat pentru a vizita diferite coli romneti. n cursul aceleiai zile am avut cteva discuii scurte cu dl. Angelescu. Redau rezumatul celor mai nsemnate remarci: Una din ngrijorrile lui era aceea c colile minoritilor nu au acordat suficient atenie noului Guvern. n foarte multe cazuri ele se comportaser ca i cum Guvernul romn nici nu ar exista, organizndu-se i reorganizndu-se dup cum le-a convenit, acordnd diplome i comind serioase abuzuri. n astfel de cazuri a fost necesar intervenia decis a Guvernului. colilor li s-au dat una sau chiar dou mustrri, i dac acestea au rmas fr efect, colile, n unele cazuri, au fost nchise. Cnd direciunea colilor a acceptat, n fine, instruciunile Ministerului, colile au fost deschise din nou. Astfel, nchiderea unei coli nu reprezenta o sanciune, ci doar o msur disciplinar, un mijloc de coerciie pentru a obine ascultarea fa de Guvern. Ca exemplu de abuz, dl. Angelescu a menionat faptul c Guvernului i-au parvenit serioase plngeri cum c, dac nainte vreme diplomele romneti de maturitate fuseser acceptabile, acum unii studeni care posed aceste diplome nu dein i cunotinele necesare. Se ntmplase chiar ca studeni cu diplome ale colilor minoritilor s nu tie s scrie i s citeasc. Decizia ca colile confesionale s nu fie ndreptite s primeasc elevi de alt confesiune i vizeaz pe evreii care fuseser maghiarizai. Dl. Angelescu nu i se pare admisibil propaganda maghiar desfurat de aceti evrei, i de aceea a emis un ordin general. Totui se fac, cu drag inim, excepii n favoarea colilor confesionale, altele dect cele evreieti. Alt decret ministerial nu permite coeducarea bieilor i a fetelor dincolo de o anumit vrst fraged. I s-a prut foarte necesar s emit acest ordin, deoarece Ministerului i-au fost prezentate cazuri scandaloase. n Romnia condiiile nu sunt de aa natur, nct s permit s

fie educai mpreun bieii i fetele. Ministrul nu mi-a dat exemple, dar a menionat faptul c n colile confesionale s-au petrecut grave abuzuri ale nvtorilor fa de copii. Politica Guvernului romn fa de minoritile sale este mult mai liberal dect cea a anumitor ri vecine. Ct privete legile colare, dl. Angelescu s-a limitat la o referire general la modificrile i textul propunerilor aduse acum n faa Parlamentului. Mi-a promis iari s-mi dea proiectul de lege privitor la colile private, care nc nu a fost naintat cabinetului. X n dimineaa lui 27 mai am fost la biroul primului-ministru, s-l vd pe dl. Ttrescu. Notez principalele puncte ale celor spuse de dl. Ttrescu: Este sub-secretar de stat pe probleme politice, inclusiv probleme ale minoritilor. A fost numit n acest post n decembrie anul trecut. ntre timp i-a organizat oficiul, n care lucreaz trei unguri i doi germani sai sau vabi. Este subordonat direct Ministerului de Interne, dar are legturi directe i cu Ministerul Afacerilor Externe, cu Ministerul Cultelor Publice i cu Ministerul Instruciunii Publice, ca i cu alte ministere, atunci cnd acest lucru este convenabil sau de dorit. Are intenia de a ataa pe lng prefecii anumitor prefecturi, acolo unde problemele minoritilor sunt de relevan particular, un funcionar sub direciunea sa, care s se ocupe n prim instan cu problemele minoritilor, s primeasc plngerile i s stabileasc punctele de diferen. Astfel va exista un plan elaborat pentru tratarea acestor probleme, pe care, sper el, minoritile l vor aprecia i folosi. Marea dificultate o reprezint cea psihologic, atmosfera creat nainte i n timpul rzboiului, precum i lipsa de disponibilitate a liderilor minoritilor de a ajunge la o nelegere. Cu puin timp n urm avusese o ntlnire cu civa dintre aceti lideri i le-a spus sincer c, dac ei continu s lucreze mpotriva unei nelegeri rezonabile, el va lua contact direct cu preoii subordonai, cu ranii, i n general cu masele populaiei aparinnd minoritilor. Rezultatul ntlnirii a fost c liderii au luat chestiunea n serios, i este posibil s aib loc o reorganizare a conducerii minoritilor din Transilvania, poate chiar peste cteva zile. Ct despre dificultile administrative17, dl. Ttrescu a spus c a ntreprins deja pai n vederea nlocuirii a trei sau patru prefeci care vdiser deficiene administrative. Vederile ministrului Instruciunii Publice sunt considerabil diferite de cele ale dl. Ttrescu. Dl. Angelescu privete chestiunile colare numai prin prisma Ministerului Instruciunii Publice al Romniei Mari, nerbdtor ca naiunea s dobndeasc cea mai bun instruciune posibil din punct de vedere romnesc. Dl. Ttrescu nelege lucrurile prin a salvgarda interesele politice ale rii n ansamblu, de maxim importan fiind ns i faptul de a mulumi minoritile. Din acest motiv, dup cum mi-a spus dl. Duca, el nu numai c a turnat ap n vinul dl. Angelescu18, dar a fcut-o ntr-o manier foarte liberal. S-au fcut amendamente la proiectul de lege despre colile de stat, i, totui, dl. Ttrescu nu a obinut tot pentru ceea ce luptase. Ct despre proiectul asupra colilor private (inclusiv a celor confesionale), acesta nc nu este gata pentru a fi supus Parlamentului. Am fost asigurat c acea copie pe care mi-o promisese dl. Angelescu urma s sufere modificri. colile confesionale: Guvernul romn este de prere c n principiu colile trebuie s fie ne-confesionale. Minoritile susin punctul de vedere contrar, cum c instruciunea public trebuie legat de biserici. Aici se afl marea dificultate real, n vederile total opuse ntr-o chestiune de principiu. Guvernul romn nu dorete deloc coli confesionale n ar, pe cnd

minoritile le consider eseniale. Dl. Ttrescu nu a artat expres dac colile confesionale vor fi permise sau interzise, dar mi-a dat de neles c dac vor fi permise, va fi ca un rezultat al concesiilor fcute pentru a satisface minoritile chiar mpotriva convingerii Guvernului. Am discutat chestiunea limbii. Am explicat opinia dl. Kisch faptul c n primii patru ani de coal copiii ar trebui lsai s-i nvee temeinic limba matern, s nvee s-o vorbeasc, s-o scrie, i s-o cunoasc din punct de vedere literar. Dl. Ttrescu a spus c este la curent cu toate argumentele n favoarea opiniei dl. Kisch. Cu toate acestea exist argumente i de partea cealalt, care par a arta c, n special, copiii pot stpni foarte bine mai mult dect o singur limb n acelai timp. M-a asigurat c nu exist nici cea mai vag intenie de a mpiedica minoritile s-i educe copiii n propria lor limb, dar c este n interesul minoritilor nsele ca ai lor copii s dobndeasc o cunoatere temeinic a limbii de stat. i de aceea trebuie s nceap devreme. Limba administrativ: actualmente nu s-au stabilit nc reguli precise, iar condiiile din diferitele localiti variaz foarte mult. n Braov, de exemplu, doar germana este folosit n actele publice i la primrie, n timp ce n unele sate puternic maghiare se folosete numai romna. Prima situaie este la fel de greit ca i cea de-a doua, de aici necesitatea emiterii unor reguli generale. Intenia dl. Ttrescu este aceea de a le emite prin decrete administrative, pentru a evita trecerea lor prin Parlament, unde regulamentele liberale pe care el le are n vedere s-ar putea izbi de o considerabil opoziie. Ideea este s se permit n administraie folosirea limbii minoritilor n orele, sate sau prefecturi. Minoritile nsele merg i mai departe, i vor ca limbile minoritilor s fie utilizate pretutindeni n administraie. Aceasta este o cerere cam rigid. Autonomia municipal: proiectul asupra unificrii administrative, elaborat anul trecut, este foarte liberal i acord municipalitilor autonomie ntr-o mare msur. Este de ateptat deci ca el s nu treac de Parlament n forma sa prezent. Pe de alt parte, n anumite localiti, primria i consiliul municipal sunt compuse din persoane aparinnd minoritilor, o situaie care ar ngreuna puin colaborarea administrativ cu Guvernul. S-a sugerat ca un anume numr, de pild patru sau cinci, dintre capii serviciilor administrative locale, care, n multe cazuri, sunt romni, s voteze ca membrii neelectivi ai consiliilor. Deoarece numrul membrilor consiliilor variaz ntre 9 i 50, nu exist nici un pericol ca aceti funcionari s devin o majoritate ori mcar un element cu mare pondere n aceste corpuri. Totui, s-a obiectat c aceast idee este antidemocratic, fcndu-se contrapropunerea ca aceti funcionari s ocupe n consiliile oreneti i steti doar locuri cu capacitate consultativ. Chestiunea nu fusese stabilit definitiv. Limba n justiie19: Este o problem cu care dl. Ttrescu nsui se confruntase prea puin. Ea se afl n minile Ministerului Justiiei. Principiul fundamental este c limba justiiei este cea romn, dar minoritilor trebuie s li se ofere faciliti ca ele s nu sufere de pe urma lipsei de cunoatere a limbii romne. n multe locuri, de fapt, limba minoritilor este utilizat foarte extins n tribunale. Aceasta este mai mult o concesie fa de starea de fapt, dect o recunoatere din partea Guvernului romn a ndreptirii unei asemenea practici. nc nu se elaboraser reguli definitive, i problema este foarte spinoas. Abuzuri locale i mici conflicte cu minoritile: Dl. Ttrescu pregtise un plan pentru nfiinarea unui muzeu al simbolurilor, statuilor, inscripiilor etc. naionale maghiare, dintre care multe fuseser ndeprtate de ctre romni n timpul tulburatei perioade de dup armistiiu. Nu i-a exprimat intenia de a include n muzeu i statui i simboluri maghiare nc neschimbate de la locul lor. Cu toate acestea, cred c poate s-a gndit c, acolo unde aceste

chestiuni reprezint surse de nemulumire, s-ar putea evita friciunile prin colecionarea simbolurilor ntr-un loc n care s fie pstrate i pzite ca sanctuar naional al minoritilor. XI n dup-masa zilei de 27 mai, mpreun cu dl. Dianu, am fost la Senat, unde i-am vzut pe dnii Teutsch i Schullerus (mi s-a spus c dl. Nagy, episcopul reformat din Cluj, nu era n ora). Cei doi domni m-au ntmpinat ntr-o manier foarte amical. I-am ntrebat despre situaia actual i despre afacerile lor cu Guvernul, i mi-au spus c pe moment atenia se concentreaz asupra legii colare aflate n faa Parlamentului. Cei doi domni tocmai primiser proiectul cu amendamentele propuse de ctre comitetul parlamentar. Erau contieni de faptul c dorinelor lor li se ieise n ntmpinare n anumite puncte. Rmneau totui dou puncte de covritoare nsemntate, n legtur cu care nu erau mulumii: unul se refer la articolul 7 al proiectului asupra limbii minoritilor n coli, iar cellalt la situaia financiar a colilor confesionale. Ulterior dl. Dianu mi-a spus c fusese impresionat de modul moderat n care discutaser domnii Teutsch i Schullerus. Apoi am mers la Camer, unde m-am ntlnit cu dl. Ttrescu, cruia i-am fcut o scurt descriere a conversaiei mele cu dnii Teutsch i Schullerus. Dl. Ttrescu a spus c el cunoate toate problemele lor, i c m asigur c el a luptat pentru a obine cele mai bune condiii. XII Pe urm am fost s m ntlnesc cu sub-secretarul de stat de la Agricultur i Domeniul de Stat, dl. Cipianu20. Dl. Duca mi-l recomandase, pentru a obine de la el informaii mai detaliate despre reforma agrar i, n special, despre distribuirea pmntului expropriat. Dl. Cipianu mi-a confirmat declaraiile pe care mi le dduse cu cteva zile nainte dl. Constantinescu21, i a spus c tocmai pregtete o statistic amnunit asupra distribuirii pe naionaliti i judee a pmntului expropriat. mi va trimite cifrele n viitorul apropiat, s zicem nu mai trziu de 4 sptmni. Dl. Cipianu a mai spus c reforma agrar este acum aproape complet. n circa trei ani ranii nu numai c vor fi n posesia fermelor lor, ceea ce este deja o stare de fapt, dar i titlurile lor /de proprietate/ vor fi n forma cuvenit i final. XIII Pe 28 mai l-am primit la hotel pe Dr. Hans Otto Roth, un deputat, pe a crui carte de vizit scria: preedinte al Partidului Parlamentar German din Romnia Mare. Dl. Roth, care este un brbat destul de tnr de-abia are la 40 de ani , a nceput prin a-mi spune c nu a venit n calitate de querulant22. A venit ntruct l rugasem s ne vedem n ziua anterioar la Camer, iar el este ct se poate de dispus s-mi ofere orice informaie a dori. Iat rezumatul celor spuse de el: Partidul German are actualmente 5 senatori i 10 deputai, partidul dl. Maniu are 29 deputai, partidul dl. Iorga 17, al generalului Averescu-Goga 6, i mai exist 1 social-democrat. n fine, rnitii au 34, i acum ncheie o alian cu grupul dl. Maniu (naionalii). Din numrul total de circa 400 deputai, opoziia nu este deloc reprezentat adecvat.

Marea problem a momentului este cea a legii colilor de stat, aflat acum n faa Parlamentului. Partidul German nu cere concesii nerezonabile, dar simte c trebuie pus n aplicare tratatul pentru protecia minoritilor. Tratatul nu ofer mai mult dect un minimum necesar. Unele articole ale proiectului sunt clar contrare tratatului minoritilor. Articolul 7 al proiectului, asupra limbii minoritilor n coli, conine cteva stipulaii clar contrare clauzelor tratatului minoritilor. coala primar acoper 7 ani, nu doar 4, iar limba minoritilor ar trebui prin urmare studiat de-a lungul celor 7 ani. Toi cetenii romni sunt obligai s parcurg cel puin aceti 7 ani, de aceea este total greit s consideri ultimii 3 ani ca nvmnt secundar. Mai departe articolul spune c ministrul poate, i nu c ar trebui sau trebuie s nfiineze coli ale minoritilor. Nici o alt indicaie nu expliciteaz proporia considerabil a minoritilor consfinit n tratat. Nici nu se precizeaz extensia districtului cruia trebuie s i se aplice regula. n plus, cuvntul steroglot nu acoper cazul cel mai comun, acela al populaiei amestecate, ci se aplic numai, stricto sensu, judeelor n care ntreaga populaie const din minoriti. Iari, cuvntul studiul din paragraful al doilea i cuvntul obiecte din paragraful al treilea ar putea fi citite n sensul c limba romn, chiar n primii 4 ani de coal, ar trebui s constituie nu materie de nvmnt, ci limba de instrucie. n general, ntregul articol acord depline puteri Ministerului Instruciunii Publice pentru a face ceea ce dorete. Nu le d minoritilor nici o garanie, n schimb le arat c situaia lor va fi foarte rea i nesatisfctoare. Ct despre grdinie, dl. Roth a spus c necazul este c Guvernul pare a avea intenia de a impune limba romn n grdiniele de stat, dei fusese introdus amendamentul conform cruia minoritilor li se acord libertatea de a crea grdinie private. Este o greeal s presupui c grdiniele nu sunt obligatorii. Date fiind condiiile, ele sunt obligatorii. (nc nu am reuit s studiez ndeaproape textul legii, dar aceasta este n direct opoziie cu ceea ce dl. Ionescu considera a fi rezonabil.) n completare la chestiunea articolului 7 i a grdinielor, dl. Roth a menionat problema finanrii colilor de stat. Conform proiectului, toate cheltuielile colilor, cu unica excepie a salariilor nvtorilor, vor fi purtate de ctre municipaliti. Aceasta ar nsemna c minoritile care vor nfiina coli confesionale sau private nu numai c vor trebui s plteasc pentru colile lor, dar vor trebui i s contribuie la ntreinerea colilor de stat ale majoritii romneti. Deoarece minoritile nc mai sunt a adugat dl. Roth cu un zmbet oarecum amar oamenii mai bogai din ar, ele vor avea de pltit n jur de 95% din costurile colilor de stat romneti, i 100% din costurile propriilor lor coli confesionale ori private. Dl. Roth considera acestea a fi contrare tratatului minoritilor. Ct privete Ecoles normales, dl. Roth a spus c proiectul fusese modificat de aa manier nct s lase chestiunea relativ deschis. A adugat el, este foarte dificil pentru minoriti s judece stipulaiile proiectului colilor de stat, atta vreme ct nu au n faa ochilor proiectul dl. Angelescu asupra colilor private i confesionale. Cele dou legi formeaz un tot indivizibil. Dr. Roth a menionat, n fine, anumite circumstane pe care el le considera ca agravante pentru abuzurile comise fa de minoritatea german. La Sntana fusese deschis o coal de stat romneasc, dei populaia orelului const n ntregime din vabi. El crede c acolo triesc numai 2 persoane de ras romn. Rezultatul a fost c n acest orel absolut german trebuie s vin la coal copiii din ntregul district, iar cheltuielile colare, cu unica excepie a salariilor nvtorilor, vor fi suportate de ctre municipalitatea german, n condiiile proiectului de lege. Concomitent, Guvernul refuzase s permit nfiinarea unei grdinie n

limba german la Sntana. La Arbore (n Bucovina), Ministerul crease o asemenea situaie, nct copiii de ras german trebuiau s se deplaseze 12 km ca s ajung la coal. XIV n dup-masa zilei de 28 mai am trecut pe la dl. Duca la Ministerul de Externe. Era foarte ocupat, aa c discuia noastr nu a durat foarte mult. Am menionat problema minoritilor. Am spus c nu doresc s intru n detalii, dar a vrea s-i supun ateniei ntrebarea dac este o politic neleapt s faci din sai i vabi, din germanii Romniei, inamici ai Guvernului. Pot s neleg faptul c dl. Angelescu ezit s adopte o atitudine profund conciliatorie fa de maghiari, dar cu siguran germanii nu reprezint nici un pericol pentru consolidarea Regatului. Dimpotriv, ei sunt un element extrem de preios al populaiei, cum sunt, de altfel, i cei mai muli dintre maghiari. N-ar fi o politic neleapt din partea Guvernului s modifice proiectul asupra colilor de stat n aa fel nct s le permit germanilor s-l voteze? Firete, nu poate exista dect o singur lege pentru toate minoritile. Dar ar fi cu certitudine posibil s ntocmeti legea astfel nct germanii s fie ctigai de partea ei. Eu a considera aceasta ca pe o chestiune politic intern i a supune-o ca atare consideraiei dl. Duca, cu convingerea c acest aspect al cazului este suficient pentru a gsi o soluie satisfctoare i din punct de vedere al proteciei minoritilor. Dl. Duca a prut s gseasc admirabil sugestia mea, i a spus c pot s fiu sigur c va mai curge nc mult ap pn cnd proiectul va trece de Parlament. Va relua chestiunea mpreun cu cabinetul i va vedea ce poate face. ntruct mi-am exprimat o oarecare ndoial cu privire la atitudinea dl. Angelescu, pe care nu voi mai avea prilejul s-l revd nainte de a prsi Bucuretiul, dl. Duca a spus c pot s-i ncredinez lui misiunea de a aranja aceasta. La plecare, dl. Duca mi-a spus c nu ne vom putea vedea desear la dineul pe care dl. Vintil Brtianu i dl. Lapedatu23 l vor oferi n cinstea noastr, dar c sper s m rentlneasc la toamn. I-am promis c voi merge n Dobrogea i Basarabia, i el i-a exprimat dorina de a-mi ine promisiunea. Am spus c n octombrie, dup toate probabilitile, voi merge n Angora i la Atena, i apoi poate va fi posibil s vin i n Romnia24. E. C. 30/5/24
NOTE 1. E. V. Harris, englezoaic, angajat din august 1919. Mouton, p. 104. 2. Delegaia romn la Adunarea General din anul 1924 a fost compus din: N. Petrescu-Comnen, I. Raicoviceanu, Constantin Angelescu, N. Titulescu, Sextil Pucariu, Elena Vcrescu, D. Ciotori, I. G. Duca, M. Iacobescu. Romnia, p. 271. 3. Au avut loc mai multe ntruniri. O parte a sugestiilor formulate de reprezentanii lor s-au inclus n legile colare din anii 1924 i 1925. 4. Lege pentru nvmntul primar al statului i nvmntul normal- primar, promulgat prin naltul Decret-Regal nr. 2571 din 24 iulie 1924 i publicat n Monitorul Oficial nr. 101 din 26 iulie 1924; Loi de lenseignement primaire de lEtat avec un expos des motifs par D. C. Angelescu. 5. Vezi Lege asupra nvmntului particular, promulgat prin naltul Decret-Regal nr. 3793 din 19 decembrie 1925 i publicat n Monitorul Oficial nr. 283 din 22 decembrie 1925. Nu insistm acum asupra drumului sinuos al acestei legi. Vom publica n curnd un articol despre dezbaterile parlamentare pe marginea ei i despre reflectarea acestei problematici n presa din Romnia. 6. Gustav D. Kisch, profesor titular de limba i literatura german. 7. Alexie Catargi.

8. Dreptul de publicitate. 9. Consulul britanic de la Bucureti, Sir Herbert Dering, avea o prere asemntoare despre Angelescu. Gh. Iancu, Imagini, p. 15. Vezi i discuiile consulului cu I. G. Duca pe tema nvmntului primar. Ibidem, p. 15-17. 10. Iuliu Maniu, Alexandru Vaida-Voevod i Mihai Popovici erau lideri marcani ai Partidului Naional Romn, adversari hotri ai liberalilor. 11. Iuliu Maniu, Problema minoritilor, Bucureti, 1924, 21 p. Conferina (inut la 11 mai 1924) a aprut i n presa de partid a vremii. 12. Evenimentul nu se va produce. Partidul Naional Liberal, condus de I. I. C. Brtianu, i va ndeplini mandatul de patru ani (19 ianuarie 1922 29 martie 1926). 13. n 1926 se va forma Partidul Naional rnesc. 14. Guvernul general Alexandru Averescu (13 martie 1920 16 decembrie 1921). Octavian Goga a fost ministru de stat. 15. Guvernul Alexandru Vaida-Voevod (1 decembrie 1919 12 martie 1920). 16. Cele spuse de Vaida-Voevod l-au surprins pe Colban. Erau nemulumirile rostite de un om politic din opoziie i care adesea erau departe de adevr. 17. Legea unificrii administrative s-a adoptat n 14 iunie 1925. 18. n sensul c a netezit asperitile la adresa minoritilor. 19. Nu s-a adoptat un act normativ privind folosirea limbii minoritilor n justiie. 20. Gheorghe Cipianu. Postul s-a nfiinat n 12 decembrie 1923. S. Neagoe, p. 90. 21. Alexandru Constantinescu, ministru la Agricultur i Domenii. 22. Cred c e o combinaie nostim ntre cuvntul francez querelleur persoan care caut ceart i cel englez toquary a ntreba, a se informa. Sensul cred c ar fi: de a se interesa de ceva. 23. Alexandru Lapedatu, ministrul Cultelor i Artelor, din 30 octombrie 1923, dup demisia lui Constantin Banu. 24. A venit sigur, dar noi nu avem raportul complet. Dispunem de un text redactat de Colban, la 31 octombrie 1924, dup o ntlnire cu Hans Otto Roth. Discuiile s-au axat n principal pe chestiuni colare. Colban i-a spus c a simit o mbuntire a situaiei minoritilor din Romnia. Roth a remarcat c that was quite true, n anumite privine. A. S. D. N., 41/40, 418/1481. E. Colban a inut dou Conferine la Universitatea din Cluj, dedicate Societii Naiunilor. Anuarul Universitii din Cluj pe anul colar 1923-24, Cluj, 1925, p. 38. La Bucureti, la Institutul Social Romn a inut conferina intitulat: La Socit des Nations, publicat in: Politica extern a Romniei, p. 245-257. Ziarele vremii au urmrit aceast vizit. Vezi: Universul nr. 111 din 19 mai 1924; Adevrul nr. 12. 364 din 20 mai, nr. 12. 367 din 24 mai, nr. 12. 370 din 29 mai 1924; ndreptarea nr. 419 din 24 mai 1924; Viitorul nr. 4863 din 25 mai 1924; LIndpendance Roumaine nr. 14. 731 le 28 mai 1924.

3. VASILE STOICA

CHOSES VUES PAR M. ERIK COLBAN PENDANT SON DERNIER VOYAGE EN TRANSYLVANIE
(23-28 octobre 1926)

I. ORADEA MARE (le 23 Octobre) 1. Chez Mgr. Traian Freniu A 10 1/2 du matin on rend un visite Mgr. Trajan Freniu, vque roumain, grec-catholique (uniate). Pendant la longue entrevue il explique comment, par suite de la rforme agraire, son riche vch, malgr que son glise soit roumaine, a perdu peu prs toutes ses terres et toutes ses

forts, qui ont t partages aux paysans et aux villages sans distinction de langue et dorigine ethnique. 2. Chez lvque Etienne Sulyok A 11 du matin M. Colban accompagn par M. Stoica rend une visite au nouvel vque calviniste hongrois, M. Etienne Sulyok. Celui-ci aux questions que lon lui pose rend hommage au gouvernement pour avoir admis la cration de ce second vch calviniste et pour avoir inscrit les frais dans son budget. Il declare quen ce qui concerne la vie ecclsiastique, son glise jouit de la libert la plus complte. Il nen est pas de mme dans la question des coles. La tendance gnrale de lEtat est dliminer autant que possible lcole confessionnelle et de la remplacer par lcole de lEtat. Dans les coles primaires confessionnelles de lglise rforme linstruction est donne en hongrois sauf les classes et les tudes prescrites par la loi pour tre enseignes en roumain. Mais bien souvent linspection des rviseurs est trop exigeante. Il est vrai nanmoins que lEtat entretient ses frais des coles primaires de langue hongroise; il ny a pas de village sans cole. Il se plaint galement de la disposition interdisant aux coles des diffrentes glises daccepter des lves dune autre confession que celle de ces coles. La grande difficult que son glise prouve est le manque de moyens financiers pour soutenir ses coles confessionnelles. Il espre que par suite du pacte lectoral conclu entre le gouvernement du Gnral Averesco et le Parti Hongrois, le Gouvernement subviendra aux frais de ces coles. En gnral, il considre que lantagonisme qui a exist entre llment hongrois et roumain et surtout entre les leaders des hautes institutions ecclsiastique hongroises en Transylvanie et les autorits suprieures de lEtat Roumain a beaucoup diminu et quil est en train de disparatre. Si cette mfiance ne disparait plus rapidement, cest cause de la maladresse et du zle exagr des autorits infrieures de lEtat. 3. Chez lvque catholique-romain Bjelik A 11 1/2 heures on est chez Mgr. Bjelik, lvque catholique- romain. Il declare que lEtat ne met aucune entrave au libre fonctionnement de son glise. Dans ses coles confessionnelles linstruction se poursuit en hongrois, sauf les tudes prescrites par la loi pour tre enseignes en roumain. La religion mme dans les coles de lEtat est enseigne dans la langue maternelle des lves par des professeurs dsigns par leur glise. Il a certaines difficults entretenir les coles cause de lexpropriation sur grande chelle laquelle son glise a t soumise. Mais le gouvernement lui a montr toujours de la bienveillance et jamais ses demandes nont t refuses. Il pense dailleurs que les Hongrois aussi, notamment leurs chefs ecclsiastiques et leurs intellectuels dans les villes et dans les villages doivent faire preuve de leur loyaut envers lEtat. Cest dans ce sens quil travaille en conseillant son clerg dapprendre le roumain, davoir toujours une attitude conciliante et de vivre en bonne entente avec les autorits et avec la population roumaine et il est heureux de constater que ses recommandations ont port fruit. 4. Chez la rabbin Leopold Kecskemthy A midi on a une entrevue avec M. Leopold Kecskemthy, rabbin des Juifs nologues. Il dclare que du point de vue du libre exercice de sa religion sa communaut na aucune plainte faire. Mais les Juifs nologues dOradea sont affligs cause de leurs coles. Leur langue maternelle nest pas le hbreux ou le yidish, mais le hongrois; pourquoi lEtat

Roumain leur impose-t-il comme aux autres Juifs, le hbreux ou le yidish ct du roumain, dans leurs coles confessionnelles? Pourquoi naccepte-t-il pas comme langue denseignement dans ces coles le hongrois et le roumain? Ils seraient contents si leurs coles taient bilingues, enseignant en hongrois et en roumain. 5. Chez le rabbin Benjamin Fuchs A 12 1/2 on a une entrevue avec M. Benjamin Fuchs, rabbin des juifs orthodoxes. Il dclare que la libert religieuse nest nullement entrave. Il considre que la situation des coles et de lenseignement correspond aux besoin et aux voeux de la population. En ce qui concerne la population juive de sa secte il a une seule observation faire, les lves juifs qui frquentent les coles de lEtat sont obligs crire et dessiner, c. a. d. faire du travail, le samedi, ce que la loi de leur religion, dfend avec svrit. Il voudrait que cette obligation cesst, mais il ne va pas jusqu demander que les lves juifs ne fussent pas obligs a frquenter lcole le samedi. Lactivit des institutions juives de sa secte se poursuit en toute libert. 6. Au lyce de lEtat A 3 heures de laprs-midi on visite la section hongroise du lyce Samuel Gozsdu, entretenue aux frais de lEtat. La section est un lyce complet huit classes lenseignement compltement en langue hongroise. Le directeur du lyce, M. Thodore Ne conduit les visiteurs. On entre dans le II-me classe. Le professeur M. Paul Jagics, un Hongrois, fait en hongrois son cours de mathmatiques. Le manuel employ par lui et par les lves et que lon voit devant chaque lve de la classe est en hongrois: Mennyisgtani kziknyv s pldatr a kzp s polgri iskolk I-III osztlyai szmra, rt Mester Mihly, reformtus fgimnziumi tanr (Cluj 1925). On passe dans la VIII-me classe, o, guids par leur professeur M. Gabriel Schroff, qui est un ancien moine piariste, les lves sont en train de traduire des textes de potes, du latin en hongrois. On visite ensuite la VII-me classe o le professeur M. Alexandre Nagy, un Hongrois, fait en hongrois son cours dhistoire universelle. Les lves rpondent en hongrois. Entre leurs mains le manuel hongrois: Egyetemes trtnelem a kzpiskolk fels osztlyai szmra rtk Bir Vencel s Dr. Patay Jzsef. (Cluj 1922) 7. lcole primaire et normale des Soeurs Immacules Les visiteurs sont reus par la suprieure qui est en mme temps la directrice de linstitution et par deux soeurs, institutrices elles-mmes. Aux questions poses par M. Colban elles le renseignent que lcole primaire a les droits de publicit tandis que lcole normale a seulement un caractre priv, que linstruction se fait en hongrois, conformment au programme tabli par la loi. Le fait que dans les classes primaires les lves font certaines tudes en roumain ne les empche nullement dapprendre lire et ecrire correctement le hongrois. 8. Seleu et Episcopia Bihorului Aprs avoir visit les localits et les parcs des stations thermales Bile Felix et Bile Episcopiei, M. Colban et ses compagnons sarrtent Seleu, petit village population mixte roumaine et hongroise. M. Colban demande aux paysans des renseignements sur lapplication

de la rforme agraire qui a eu lieu dans cette localit. La plupart des paysans lui dclarent quils ont reu de la terre, sans aucune distinction dorigine ethnique, et que tous ont fait leur service militaire pendant la guerre dans larme austro-hongroise. Beaucoup de paysans ont reu galement du terrain pour se btir des maisons et dautres btisses agricoles. La plupart dentre eux, au long de la chause, sont dej installs dans leurs nouvelles demeures, et aux questions de M. Colban rpondent quils sont dorigine hongroise, que la terre et les enclos pour leurs maisons leur ont t donns par le gouvernement roumain, quils navaient pas de terre auparavant et que cette terre quils ont reue, a t exproprie sur les biens de lvch catholique roumain dOradea Mare. En mme temps ils dclarent tous que dans leur village ils ont une glise et une cole hongroises. En rebroussant chemin et en passant par Oradea Mare, M. Colban se rend la tombe du soir Episcopia Bihorului prs de la frontire hongroise. Ce qui lintresse, cest lapplication de la loi agraire. Les paysans qui se trouvent devant leurs maisons rcemment bties, aussi bien prs de la chausse que dans une rue toute nouvelle, lui dclarent que pour la plupart ils sont dorigine hongroise, quavant la guerre ils navaient pas de terre et de maisons, que pendant la guerre ils ont combattu dans les rangs de larme austro-hongroise, que malgr ce pass et malgr leur origine ils ont reu de la terre en lots de 3 acres (3 joch autrichiens; en roumain iugr), et du terrain pour leurs maisons et leurs btisses agricoles, que la terre avant la rforme agraire appartenait lvch catholique dOradea Mare. Les Hongrois dclarent quils ont une cole primaire hongroise avec certains objets dtude en roumain. A 10 heures du soir on part pour Aiud. II. AIUD 1. Aux coles calvinistes Bethlen On arrive le 24 Octobre 6 heures du matin. On visite les coles confessionnelles de lEglise Rforme Calviniste, langue dinstruction hongroise; lcole Normale de Garons; lcole Normale de jeunes Filles; le lyce et lcole primaire, adjointe lcole normale. Le directeur Aron Ferencz donne les explications ncesaires. Linstruction se fait en hongrois, sauf les tudes qui, en vertu de la loi, doivent tre enseignes en roumain. Les registres des classes et de la direction sont bilingues. Une partie des terres et des forts de ces institutions a t exproprie (les biens de main-morte); il leur est rest 1500 acres de forts et 56 acres de terre arable, mais dernirement le Conseil Suprieur de la Reforme Agraire a dcid de leur restituer encore 1000 acres de forts et 100 acres de terre arable. Les professeurs et les instituteurs sont tous des Hongrois calvinistes. La plupart dentre aux ne parle pas du tout le roumain. Les lves sont galement tous des Hongrois calvinistes sauf un petit nombre de catholiques. On visite lcole normale de garons. Dans la II-me classe le professeur Franois Gyrgy fait son cours de grammaire hongroise (les suffixes). Le manuel est le Magyar lvasoknyv s nyelvtani sszefoglals a kzpiskola II. Osztlya szmra, szerkesztette Kiss Ern dr. , paru Kolozsvr (non pas Cluj) en 1922. Dans la VI-me classe cest lheure de physique exprimentale (la rflexion) du professeur Sigismond Hegeds; on lenseigne en hongrois. Le manuel est le Kisrleti Fizika a kzp s polgri iskolk szmra rta Csefo Sndor (Cluj 1924). On passe lcole normale de jeunes filles. De ses 133 lves, toutes des jeunes filles hongroises, 109 sont calvinistes, 6 luthriennes, 4 unitaires, 14 catholiques romaines. Lcole

a 7 classes. Dans la II-me classe o lon entre, le professeur Etienne Zalnyi, fait son cours de physique, dans la III-me M-lle Lenka Mor fait son cours dhygine et anthropologie, dans la V-me M-me Maria Ajtoi enseigne la langue et la littrature hongroises. A lcole primaire qui est attache lcole normale et qui sert dcole dapplication on enseigne les mathmatiques. Dans toutes ces classes lenseignement est en hongrois, ce nest que dans la VI-me classe normale de jeunes filles que le professeur Victor Elekes fait en roumain selon la loi son cours de gographie de la Roumanie. Au lyce calviniste que lon visite galement, on assiste au cours de religion que fait en hongrois le professeur Jean Zajzen daprs les manuels Akikre nem volt mlt a vilg par Emeric Rvsz (Cluj, 1921) et Reformtus egyhzi nekesknyv (dit par lvch calviniste Cluj en 1923). Dans la VII-me classe le professeur Mathieu Marterot fait son cours de grammaire franaise. M. Marterot est membre de la mission de professeurs franais que le gouvernement roumain a invits en Roumanie; il est au service de lEtat et pay par le gouvernement. Nanmoins les autorits suprieures lont mis pour un certain nombre dheures par semaine la dispositions de cette cole afin que les lves hongrois puissent sapproprier une bonne prononciation franaise. 2. A lcole primaire de lEtat dAiud Lcole a une section roumaine (300 lves) et une section hongroise (144 lves). Le directeur, M. Jean Kdr est un Hongrois. La section hongroise en dehors du directeur a 4 instituteurs (dont un ne parle pas du tout le roumain), tous hongrois, qui avant lUnion avaient t au service de lEtat hongrois, M. M. Ladislau Turczi, Martin Balogh (substitu temporairement par Fraois Farkas), Denis Szcs et M-me Marie Szatmri. En visitant les classes on trouve linstituteur Denis Szcs enseignant la classe II-IIIe la langue et la lecture hongroises, daprs le manuel Az elemi iskolk II. osztlynak tanknyve de M-me Szentptery-Haller et M. Michel Gazdac (Deva 1926), le directeur Jean Kdr enseignant la IV-me classe galement la lecture hongroise, sur un manuel compos pour cette classe par les mmes auteurs. Le directeur et les instituteurs dclarent que la langue denseignement de la section hongroise est le hongrois sauf pour les tudes prescrites par la loi, que la religion est enseigne en hongrois par des professeur choisis par les autorits ecclsiastiques elles-mmes et que le fait que certaines tudes sont enseignes en roumain nempche aucunement les lves de bien parler et bien crire le hongrois. 3. Vinul de Sus En route vers Cluj on sarrte lcole primaire de lEtat Vinul de Sus. Elle a une section roumaine (23 lves) et une section hongroise (160 lves). Lenseignement dans celle-ci est en hongrois, avec en roumain les tudes tablies par la loi. La section hongroise a 4 instituteurs: M. M. Andr Portik, Eugne Mtys, Rodolphe Izsk, Joseph Katona. La religion est enseigne galement en hongrois, par le cur catholique Ladislas Kacs. La section roumaine a le directeur M. Nicolas Margineano et linstitutrice M-lle I. Vasilache, qui enseigne en mme temps la langue roumaine la section hongroise, les instituteurs de celle-ci ne parlant pas suffisamment le roumain. 4. Turda lcole primaire calviniste, que lon visite, on trouve quil y a 140 lves, tous des Hongrois calvinistes. Le directeur M. Georges Zalnyi et les deux institutrices M-mes Gizelle

Mezei et Juliette Kolumbn dclarent que lenseignement est donn en hongrois, sauf selon la loi la langue roumaine, la gographie et lhistoire de Roumanie, la religion est enseigne galement en hongrois, et que les lves apprennent tous lire et crire correctement leur langue maternelle, ils nen sont nullement entravs par ltude du roumain dont ils ont dailleurs grand besoin. lcole primaire de lEtat on trouve une section hongroise 5 instituteurs (200 lves) et une section roumaine 8 instituteurs. Les dclarations des instituteurs hongrois sont les mmes que celles des instituteurs de lcole calviniste: les lves apprennent tous lire et crire correctement le hongrois. Entre lcole de lEtat et lcole calviniste il y a des relations damiti intime. III. CLUJ (le 25-26 Octobre) 1. Chez le chanoine catholique-romain Andr Balzs Le 25 Octobre, 10 heures du matin, M. Colban accompagn par M. Stoica rend une visite au chanoine Andr Balzs, chef du dpartement des coles catholique-romaines, dAlba Iulia. Le chanoine dclare ds le commencement que depuis sa dernire entrevue avec M. Colban une amlioration sest produite dans la situation de la minorit hongroise en Roumanie. Le gouvernement du gnral Averesco a mme conclu un pacte avec le Parti Hongrois dont le contenu tmoigne de beaucoup de bienveillance envers les coles hongroises. Malheuresement les directeurs du Ministre et les rviseurs interprtent toutes les dispositions dans un sens dfavorable aux coles confessionnelles. Ils ont la tendance dliminer lcole confessionnelle et de la remplacer par lcole de lEtat. Dans ce but on applique la loi avec une svrit extrme. On nadmet dans les coles confessionnelles que des lves de la mme langue maternelle que les coles. Des Juifs ne sont pas admis suivre les cours des coles catholiques. Ils doivent sinscrire ou aux coles de lEtat ou aux confessionnelles juives. De mme les rviseurs nadmettent pas dans les coles confessionnelles hongroises les lves quils considrent comme tant dorigine et de langue maternelle roumaine. Aux examens de baccalaurat on a procd avec trop de rigueur envers les lves des lyces minoritaires. Entre la loi des coles prives et le rglement de son application il y a des contradictions. La grande difficult des coles catholiques hongroises est le manque de moyen financiers: Unsere dringendste Notwendigkeit ist die Staatsuntersttzung . On espre que par suite du pacte conclu entre le parti hongrois et le parti du gouvernement les glises hongroises obtiendront de lEtat une subvention pour leurs coles. 2. Chez lvque calviniste Alexandre Makkay 10 1/2 on se rend chez lvque calviniste (rform) Alexandre Makkay. Celui-ci, un homme jeune encore, parle avec beaucoup de calme avec un profond sens des ralits. Selon lui, la situation de la minorit hongroise sest beaucoup amliore, lantagonisme sest apais peu prs compltement. Partout les villages population hongroise ont des coles. Une partie de ces coles, bien que de langue hongroise, sont des coles dEtat. Lglise rforme fait tous les efforts pour soutenir ses coles confessionnelles. Mais la situation de ces coles est assez prcaire cause du manque de fonds et les paroisses ne peuvent pas simposer des sacrifices plus grands. On est en pourparlers avec le gouvernement et on espre obtenir une subvention. Le gouvernement actuel sest cr une atmosphre trs favorable pour une entente. Il comprend la situation de la minorit hongroise et il a montr beaucoup de bonne

volont; on espre que les autorits infrieures suivront galement lexemple den haut. Naturellement il a t difficile dliminer tout malentendu dans le court intervalle qui sest coul depuis la guerre mondiale jusqu ce jour. On y parvient par degrs. Le peuple hongrois et le peuple roumain, les grandes masses, vivent dans une harmonie complte. Les autorits de lEtat, partout o lvque sest prsent en visitant ses ouailles lui ont prt leur concours le plus complet. Nous voulons garder intactes notre libert religieuse et nos institutions et nous voulons obtenir une subvention pour nos coles; mais nous voulons nous entendre avec lEtat Roumain et nous encadrer dans sa vie et nous voulons rsoudre nos problmes ici, dans notre propre pays. 3. Chez lvque unitaire Joseph Ferencz 11 1/2 heures on a une entrevue avec lvque Joseph Ferencz, chef de lglise unitaire. Il rpte dun air fatigu quelques-unes des plaintes formules dej par le Chanoine Balzs. Il admet nanmoins quune amlioration sest produite. 4. Chez le prsident de la communaut juive Felix Adler A midi on voit M. Felix Adler, prsident de la communaut juive. Il constate que la situation, aussi bien du point de vue conomique que du point de vue politique, samliore avec une grande rapidit et que le gouvernement montre beaucoup de sollicitude pour les besoins des minorits ethniques, Juifs y compris. Du point de vue de la religion les Juifs jouissent de la libert la plus complte, les coles talmudiques ne sont entraves dans leurs fonctionnement par aucune restriction ou chicane. Il na quune seule plainte a faire; par une application svre de la loi le Ministre a retir le caractre dcole publique mais il est en train de lobtenir de nouveau. 5. Chez M. Georges Bethlen, prsident du Parti Hongrois 12 1/2 on rend une visite M. Georges Bethlen, prsident du Parti Hongrois et curateur de lglise calviniste de Transylvanie. M. Colban lui explique les buts de la Socit des Nations en ce qui concerne le problme des minorits ethniques. M. Bethlen constate quune amlioration sensible sest produite en Roumanie dans ce sens et il prsente quelques observations: lapplication trop svre de la loi envers les coles confessionnelles et surtout le manque de fonds pour subvenir leur existence. Il espre que le pacte que son parti a conclu avec le gnral Averesco portera fruits dans cette question aussi et que le gouvernement ne refusera pas une subvention ces coles. 6. Rscruci (Valasut) Lcole primaire de lEtat a une section hongroise (57 lves) et une section roumaine (112 lves). La section hongroise a une institutrice, M-me Giselle Bader, la section roumaine M. Al. Mureano, et M-lle Marioara Atileanu. Lenseignement dans la section hongroise et donn en hongrois M-me Bader ne parlant mme pas le roumain. Dans la II-III-me classe on trouve le mme manuel que lon a trouv Aiud: Az elemi iskolk II. osztlynak tanknyve. par M-me Szentptery- Haller et M. Gazdac. 7. Bontzida Lcole primaire de lEtat a une section roumaine (instituteurs: Jean Corpodean, Elena Jacobesco et Marguerite Rotenbiller) et une section hongroise (instituteurs: Ladislau Kelemen

et Franois Flp). Linstituteur Kelemen avait t avant lUnion pendant 26 ans au service de lEtat hongrois, linstituteur Flp (qui ne parle pas le roumain), celui de lglise catholique. Les instituteurs, les paysans et le notaire du village M. Jaques Roth, galement un Hongrois, dclarent quil y a eu dans le village une cole primaire calviniste mais que ses ouailles ont refus de continuer la soutenir et ont dcid de la supprimer et denvoyer leurs enfants, lcole de lEtat. (Voir mmoire Protection des Minorits en Roumanie prsent par M. Comnne le 1 dec. 1925, p. 119). Sur la route de Bontzida et la mairie du village on constate qu Bontzida aussi bien qu Rscruci, la distribution de la terre par suite de la rforme agraire a t faite sans la moindre distinction dorigine ethnique, de langue ou de religion et que les paysans qui ont obtenu la terre et le terrain pour se btir des maisons sont tous danciens soldats des armes austro-hongroises. 8. Cojocna On visite la tombe du soir lcole primaire catholique romaine. Le cur dclare que la langue denseignement est le hongrois, que les lves ne sont pas empchs par ltude du roumain dapprendre lire et crire correctement le hongrois, que lcole na que des difficults dordre materiel. 9. Svdisla Lcole primaire de lEtat installe dans un difice excellent est une cole compltement hongroise. Elle a trois instituteurs hongrois: Ladislau Szkely, Jolnka Modorcsa-Jakab et Madeleine Dsi et une institutrice roumaine, M-lle Julliete German, qui enseigne la langue roumaine. Les quelques lves roumains du village frquentent cette cole et font leurs tudes primaires en hongrois (V. mmoire cit, p. 121). La paroisse calviniste soutient une cole confessionnelle 91 lves et 2 instituteurs: M. Etienne Kolumbn et M-me Hlne Debreceni. Les classes sont toutes entasses dans une petite chambre insalubre et sans lumire. Linstituteur fonctionne sans lautorisation de lEtat. A la mairie et ladministration du district (la prture) on constate par les documents officieles mis la disposition de M. Colban par le prteur M. Aurel Goa et par son secrtaire M. Emeric Mszros (un Hongrois) que par suite de la reforme agraire on a distribu de la terre 81 paysans de ce village qui sont tous des Hongrois, et que cest seulement 3 fonctionnaires roumains que lon a accord du terrain pour se btir des maisons. 10. Vlaha On constate quil y a une cole dEtat 4 instituteurs et langue denseignement hongroise. Les instituteurs sont des Hongrois qui ont fonctionn en cette qualit sous lancien rgime aussi (V. mem. c. p. 119). Les renseignements sont fournis M. Colban par les paysans et par le directeur Zoltn Benedek et linstituteur Joseph Teleki. 11. Luna Lcole primaire de lEtat a une section hongroise et une section roumaine, 2 instituteurs chacune. Les instituteurs de la section hongroise sont des Hongrois, M. Charles Kutas, qui a fonctionn pendant 18 ans comme instituteur lcole hongroise de Zam Sn-Crai au service de lEtat hongrois, et M-lle Etelka Kovcs. Ils dclarent que linstruction dans leur section se

fait en hongrois et que lenseignement du roumain nest nullement nuisible lenseignement de la langue maternelle des lves. IV. SIGHIOARA ODORHEI (le 26 Octobre) 1. Sighioara Le maire de Sighioara, Dr. Leonhard, dclare que dans la ville la population vit dans une harmonie complte et quaucune minorit nest perscute. la mairie de la ville la majorit des fonctionnaires sont des Allemands; parmi 26 fonctionnaires il y a 22 Allemands et 4 Roumains. En ce qui concerne les coles, chaque minorit a ses propres coles confessionnelles. Les Hongrois ont 2 coles primaires langue dinstruction hongroise, une cole catholique et une cole calviniste. Les Allemands, qui sont tous luthriens, ont des coles primaires, un lyce, une cole secondaire de jeunes filles, une cole normale de jeunes filles. Il y a eu une cole dEtat langue denseignement hongroise, mais les lves sont passs aux coles confessionnelles et les deux instituteurs hongrois, M. M. Eugne Schlachtner et Fenklek Sieghart ont t attachs au service du rviseur. Par les documents officiels et par les renseignements que prsente M. Colban le prfet M. Aurel Popa et le secrtaire du dpartement M. Frederic Walter, un Allemand lui-mme, on constate que parmi les 26 fonctionnaires suprieurs de ladministration centrale du dpartement de Trnava Mare il ny a que 13 qui soient roumains, et que parmi les 110 notaires des villages du dpartement il y a 44 Allemands, 16 Hongrois et seulement 50 Roumains (Mm. X. p. 129). 2. Albeti On constate quil y a une cole confessionnelle hongroise un instituteur (M. Sipo) et 20 lves, entretenue par lglise calviniste. 3. Hafalu [Vntori] Lcole primaire de lEtat a une section roumaine 2 instituteurs et une section hongroise une institutrice (M-lle Marguerite Vanszer). Il y a galement une cole primaire calviniste, langue denseignement hongroise (V. mm. c. p. 123). 4. Secuieni Lcole de lEtat est une cole langue hongroise et 2 instituteurs, M. M. Andr Horvth et Pierre Fazekas, qui tous les deux sont des Hongrois. 5. Bodogaia Lcole dEtat a une section hongroise 2 instituteurs et 70 lves. Les instituteurs sont M. Samuel Pap et M-me Marie Pap-Szke, sa femme. M. Pap est en mme temps chantre et de lglise hongroise calviniste et de lglise hongroise unitaire. M-me Pap-Szke dclare que la langue denseignement dans leur section et le hongrois, que la religion est enseigne en hongrois par les pasteurs et que lenseignement du roumain nempche pas les lves dapprendre correctement leur langue maternelle. 6. Cristur

Il y a 3 coles primaires hongroises, entretenues par les glises: une cole calviniste 1 instituteur, une cole catholique-romaine 2, et une cole unitaire 2 instituteurs. Il y a galement un lyce hongrois de confession unitaire. Linstruction dans toutes ces coles se fait en hongrois sauf les tudes roumaines prescrites par la loi. Il y a aussi une cole primaire dEtat langue denseignement roumaine. Nanmoins dans cette cole on enseigne le hongrois une heure par jour dans chaque classe. Il est intressant de constater que cest cette cole quenvoient leurs enfants les intellectuels hongrois les plus distingus de la ville: le docteur Viola, les avocats Denis Elekes et Gabriel Ferenczi, le directeur de banque Nicolae Szakcs, les professeurs du lyce unitaire hongrois Gheza Lorinczy et Franois Szolga. 7. Beteti On constate quil y a une cole hongroise calviniste un instituteur (M. Georges Kinda) et 50 lves. 8. Oeni Lcole dEtat est une cole compltement hongroise 3 instituteurs hongrois: M. Moise Vida, qui en est le directeur et M-mes Elisabeth Tams et Emile Molnr-Tams. M. Vida a fonctionn dans ce village comme instituteur de lEtat hongrois pendant 20 ans. En 1919 on a fond dans le village une cole confessionnnelle calviniste, dont il est devenu le directeur. Mais lcole tait mal loge, entasse dans une petite chambre, elle manquait de tout et mme elle suivait lancien programme de lEtat hongrois. La paroisse nayant plus les moyens pour subvenir ses besoins selon la loi, elle a t dissoute en 1923 et M. Vida est pass, en qualit de directeur, lcole de lEtat. 9. Feliceni On constate lexistence dune cole dEtat langue denseignement hongroise et un instituteur hongrois: M. Aladr Molnr. 10. Martinus [Mrtini] On constate lexistence dune cole dEtat langue denseignement hongroise et 2 instituteurs hongrois: M. Albert Bed et M-me Vilma Mzes-Molnr, la femme du pasteur hongrois du village. 11. Vleni On constate lexistence dune cole dEtat langue hongroise. Linstituteur est M. Guillaume Molnr, un Hongrois. 12. Arveni Le prsident du comit scolaire M. Moise Pter informe M. Colban que lcole appartient lEtat, que linstruction se fait en hongrois, quil ny a que 12 lves et que linstitutrice est M-lle Bske Csiky. V. ODORHEI SF. GHEORGHE BRAOV (le 27 Octobre) 1. Odorhei En ce qui concerne lducation primaire on constate quil y a pour la population hongroise plusieurs coles primaires confessionnelles, et notamment: une cole catholique-romaine de

garons, une cole catholique-romaine de jeunes filles, une cole catholique-romaine mixte, une cole calviniste, une cole maternelle catholique-romaine. Lcole calviniste a t fonde en 1922. M. Antoine Szab, instituteur lcole catholique de jeunes filles, qui donne ces renseignements M. Colban ajoute: il y a assez de place dans ces coles pour tous les enfants hongrois de la ville. Il y a dans la petite ville galement une cole primaire de garons, une cole primaire de jeunes filles et une cole maternelle, entretenues aux frais de lEtat et langue denseignement roumaine. Nanmoins dans chaque classe il y a une heure denseignement hongrois par jour. Les renseignements officiels dmontrent que le maire A. J. est un Hongrois, que parmi les fonctionnaires de la mairie il y a 20 Hongrois et 3 Roumains, que parmi les fonctionnaires de ladministration centrale du dpartement dOdorhei il y a 35 Hongrois et 3 Roumains. Au palais de justice il y a galement 8 juges hongrois et 7 Roumains. Parmi les 99 coles dEtat du dpartement 92 ont comme langue denseignement le hongrois et seulement 7 le roumain. Parmi les instituteurs dEtat du departement 167 sont des Hongrois et seulement 17 des Roumains. En 1925-26 lEtat a construit dans le dpartement 22 difices, tous pour des coles langue denseignement hongroise. 2. Rare On constate lexistence dune cole dEtat langue hongroise, dont linstituteur est M. Franois Albert, un Hongrois. 3. Sn-Paul On constate galement que lcole de lEtat est une cole langue hongroise. Les deux instituteurs, M. Acosh Plfy et M-lle Hlne Bence sont des Hongrois. M. Plfy est instituteur cette cole depuis 12 ans. On apprend de M. Plfy des dtails sur la manire dont M. Kornish a ramass ses renseignements Sn-Paul. Le vicaire Boros sest prsent dans le village et a invit a une confrence les pasteurs des alentours. Dix-neuf pasteurs ont pris part cette confrence. Cest le lendemain ou deux jours aprs quest arriv M. Kornish, accompagn par le Dr. Csiky et le Dr. Elek Kiss (qui est prsent Budapest), qui lui servaient dinterprtes. Les pasteurs qui se sont prsents M. Kornish ont t les mmes qui ont pris part la confrence du vicaire Boros. 4. Ocland Il y a une cole dEtat langue denseignement hongroise. Lcole a 58 lves et un instituteur, M. Franois Szke. Il y a galement une cole primaire unitaire, sans droit de publicit. Lcole na que 20 lves, la grande majorit des enfants du village suivant les cours de lcole de lEtat, mais elle a deux instituteurs. Elle na pas exist avant la guerre. Les lves sont entasss dans une chambre insalubre. Les instituteurs M. Charles Vaida et M-me Hlne Bed-Szigeti dclarent avec passion que dans lcole de lEtat les lves napprennent pas lire et crire le hongrois correctement, que ce but nest atteint que dans lcole confessionnelle et que lenseignement en roumain de certaines tudes tablies par la loi empche les lves hongrois de bien parler leur langue. Lcole a eu des ennuis cette anne. Etant une cole prive, ses lves devaient passer leur examen devant la commission de lEtat et en mme temps se conformer au programme officiel, qui lui a t communiqu par le

rviseur. La direction de lcole a refus de se conformer au programme et dadmettre la prsence de la commission de lEtat aux examens de juin. La consquence: lexamen a t dclar nul et les lves ont d se prsenter un nouvel examen le 17 septembre, qui na t pass que par un trs petit nombre. Le pasteur unitaire Franois Pl qui donne a M. Colban ces informations ajoute que la paroisse et lcole ont agi ainsi sur les instructions quils ont reues du Consistoire unitaire de Cluj. 5. Vrghi Lcole de lEtat 3 instituteurs est roumaine, mais elle est frquente non pas seulement par des lves roumains mais aussi par des lves hongrois. Les Hongrois nont pas demand la cration dune cole dEtat langue hongroise. Ils ont une cole confessionnelle unitaire 3 instituteurs, pour 39 lves: M. Charles Kiss qui en est le directeur et M-mes Berta Kiss et Elisabeth Kiss-Osvth. La langue denseignement est le hongrois. On entre dans la II-me classe: M-me Kiss-Osvth enseigne les mathematiques, en hongrois. 6. Tlioara On constate quil y a une cole dEtat ayant comme langue dinstruction le hongrois. M-me Irma Becsak-Keresztes, linstitutrice, dclare que le directeur est son mari, M. Jean Becsak, quils sont hongrois tous les deux et quils ont 91 lves, parmi lesquels se trouve un Roumain. 7. Baraolt On constate quil y a une cole dEtat langue hongroise et une cole confessionnelle catholique. Lcole de lEtat que lon visite a 4 instituteurs dont 3 Hongrois, M. Eugne Gspr qui en est le directeur, M. Andr Laszl, et M-lle Beatrice Molnr, et un Roumain, M. Jean erban, qui enseigne le roumain. M. Gspr est en mme temps le conducteur du choeur hongrois de la bourgade. Il dclare que lenseignement du roumain nest aucune entrave pour lenseignement de la langue maternelle. Lcole a 135 lves, parmi lesquels 5 Roumains. Lcole confessionnelle catholique, que lon visite galement, a 4 instituteurs, tous hongrois: M. Jules Incze qui en est le directeur, MM. Louis Nagy, Moise Tako et M-me Isabella Lszl-Kiss. Les lves savent trs bien lire et crire leur langue maternelle malgr ltude du roumain. Les renseignements sont confirms et complts par le cur Gaspar Botar. 8. Biboreni On constate que lcole de lEtat 2 instituteurs a comme langue denseignement le hongrois et que son directeur est un Hongrois, M. rpd Mt. 9. Banii Mari Il y a une cole dEtat qui a une section roumaine un instituteur, M. Constantin Boeriu, et une section hongroise 5 instituteurs qui sont tous des Hongrois: M. Guillaume Borbt, le directeur, MM. Paul Nagy, Adalbert Zsigmond, Zoltn Zsigmond et M-me Dalma Borbt. M. Borbt, le directeur, dclare quil vit dans ce village depuis 30 ans et que sous lancien rgime il tait galement instituteur, au service de lEtat hongrois. Lenseignement du roumain nempche pas du tout les lves dapprendre bien lire et crire le hongrois. Dailleurs les

enfants et les parents sont trs contents dapprendre le roumain, parce que les Szeklers, qui cherchent souvent du travail dans les villes de la Valachie, en ont grand besoin. Dans le village il y a galement une cole rforme, mais elle est installe dans une sorte de cabane qui scroule. M. Colban et ses compagnons se sont photographis devant cette cole. 10. Micfalu Il y a une cole dEtat langue roumaine et une cole dEtat langue hongroise. Cette dernire a deux institutrices hongroises: M-mes Vilva Kerekes et Hlne Mark. 11. Malna Il y a une cole dEtat langue hongroise. Les instituteurs sont M. Joseph Czintos et sa femme, hongrois tous les deux. La paroisse calviniste soutient une cole confessionnelle 3 instituteurs. Le directeur, qui est en mme temps le pasteur calviniste du village, dclare que linstruction se fait en hongrois et que lenseignement du roumain nempche nullement le bon enseignement du hongrois. 12. Olteni On constate quil y a deux coles hongroises: une cole dEtat ayant comme instituteur M. Gabriel Vitlyos, et une cole calviniste ayant comme instituteur M. Bla Fazakas. 13. Sfntu-Gheorghe Lcole primaire de lEtat que lon visite a une section roumaine 3 instituteurs et une section hongroise 8 instituteurs, qui sont tous des Hongrois: Etienne Gyrgybir, Joseph Pap, Louis Kirly, Irene Csiky, Elisabeth Szsz, Elisabeth Rendek, Julienne Muscalu, Hlne Lszl. M. Louis Kirly et M-me Hlne Lszl enseignent dans le foubourg Semeria. Daprs les renseignements donns par les instituteurs Louis Kirly et Irne Csiky lenseignement se fait en hongrois sauf les tudes roumaines tablies par la loi. Les lves ne sont nullement empchs par les tudes roumaines dapprendre lire et crire correctement leur langue maternelle. Tous les instituteurs ont fonctionn dans cette qualit aux cole de lEtat hongrois avant la guerre. On visite galement lcole primaire catholique des soeurs franciscaines. Son directeur est le cur Charles Szkely, les trois institutrices sont les soeurs Carine Marie Fieger, Gustavine Oeffenberger et Angeline Marie Hpfner. Les soeurs dclarent que la langue denseignement de leur cole est le hongrois, que les lves sont pour la plupart catholiques, mais quil y a parmi eux un certain nombre de calvinistes et dunitaires, que les lves apprennent avec beaucoup de plaisir la langue roumaine et quils ne sont aucunement empchs par cette tude dapprendre lire et crire correctement le hongrois. Les professeurs du lyce hongrois calviniste Theodore Andrssy, Victor Daniel et Albert Szsz informent M. Colban sur leur institution. la question de M. Colban si les lves des coles primaires sont assez bien prpars leur entre au lyce, le professeur Daniel dclare que les lves provenant des coles confessionnelles hongroises sont bien prpars, au contraire ceux qui proviennent des coles de lEtat ne le sont pas, parce que dans ces coles ltude de la langue hongroise est zurckgedrangt. la question sil peut preciser des cas

ou des coles hongroises dEtat o ltude du hongrois serait si nglige, il repond quil na pas de donnes exactes sur cette question. Le maire de la ville M. Gabriel Kovsznay, un Hongrois lui-mme, dclare que parmi les 24 fonctionnaires de la ville il ny a que 6 qui soient roumains, les autres 18 tant hongrois. On constate aussi que parmi les 54 notaires des villages du dpartement de Trei Scaune il ny a que 3 Roumains, tandis que les autres 51 sont des Hongrois. 14. Braov Le pasteur allemand-saxon Georges Scherg, que lon rencontre et que lon visite dans sa maison, dclare que la population allemande- saxonne a ses propres coles confessionnelles o lallemand est enseign en toute libert. Ils jouissent dune libert religieuse complte. Dailleurs cette minorit est profondment loyale, nayant pas de congenres auxquels elle pourrait se joindre; elle na donc aucun intrt regarder au del des frontires du pays. Nanmoins la loi scolaire du Dr. Angelesco lui a fait de la peine: la langue maternelle est trop zurckgedrngt par la langue de lEtat. Mais le ministre Petrovici parait avoir plus de comprhension pour la minorit saxone. Naturellement il est trs difficile de rendre content tout le monde dans une poque de transition. La population allemande, partout o elle habite, peut employer librement sa langue devant les autorits. Il affirme que les jeunes gens saxons aprs avoir pass leur examen de baccalaurat ont des difficults tre reus dans les coles dofficiers de rserve et que le conseil municipal de Braov a t dissous par le gouvernement. Ces deux informations sont dmenties le mme soir par M. Emil Neugeboren, un des leaders politiques des Saxons de Transylvanie. On visite lcole secondaire de jeunes filles soutenue par lglise saxonne luthrienne, o le directeur M. Adolphe Meschendrfer, homme de lettres bien connu, donne M. Colban les renseignements ncessaires. On passe ensuite lcole primaire saxonne, o dans la I-re classe on assiste au cours de M-lle Dora Teutsch. En ce qui concerne lenseignement hongrois Braov on constate quil y a 4 coles primaires confessionnelles: 2 coles catholiques- romaines, 1 cole calviniste et 1 cole luthrienne. Tous les instituteurs de ces coles sont des Hongrois et enseignent dans cette langue. Il y a galement 2 coles secondaires (civiles) catholiques, 1 lyce catholique et 1 cole suprieure de commerce soutenues par lglise calviniste. Parmi les coles primaires de lEtat les coles no. 2, 3 et 4 ont des sections hongroises ct des sections roumaines. La section hongroise de lcole No. 2 a deux instituteurs, MM. Victor Olah et Pierre Pop, celle de lcole No. 3 en a un, M. Fanois Nagy et celle de lcole No. 4 en a deux, M-lles Etelka Casato et Hlne Preiszner. Tous ces instituteurs sont des Hongrois; lenseignements dans leurs sections est fait en hongrois. 15. Rnov En rentrant de Bran on sarrte Rnov et on constate que dans la commune il y a une grande cole luthrienne langue denseignement allemande. 16. Cristian On visite lcole langue denseignement roumaine. Le bel edifice appartenait lglise orthodoxe roumaine, mais il a t mis la disposition de lEtat par la paroisse. Le soir du 27 Octobre on part pour Bucarest et le lendemain on est dans la Capitale. BASILE STOICA

Arhiva Ministerului de Externe, Bucureti, fondul Geneva, dosar 213, f. 119-128; Arhivele Naionale, Bucureti, fondul Ministerul Propagandei Naionale, dosar 1.

3. VASILE STOICA

LUCRURI VZUTE DE CTRE ERIK COLBAN N TIMPUL ULTIMEI SALE CLTORII N TRANSILVANIA
(23-28 OCTOMBRIE 1926)1 I. ORADEA MARE (23 octombrie) 1. La monseniorul Traian Freniu La 10 dimineaa se face o vizit la monseniorul Traian Freniu, episcop greco-catolic (unit). n timpul ndelungatei ntrevederi el explic modul n care, n urma reformei agrare, bogatul su episcopat, dei romn, a pierdut, puin cte puin, toate pmnturile i toate pdurile, care au fost mprite ranilor i satelor, fr distincie de limb sau origine etnic. 2. La episcopul Etienne (tefan) Sulyok La ora 11 dimineaa dl. Colban nsoit de dl. Stoica face o vizit la noul episcop. Acesta, la ntrebrile care i se pun, aduce un omagiu guvernului pentru a fi permis crearea acestui al doilea episcopat calvinist i pentru a-l fi nscris n cheltuielile sale bugetare2. El declar c, n ceea ce privete viaa ecleziastic, biserica sa se bucur de libertatea cea mai complet. Nu este acelai lucru n privina colilor. Tendina general a statului este s elimine, pe ct posibil, coala confesional i s o nlocuiasc cu coala de stat. n colile primare confesionale ale bisericii reformate, nvarea se face n maghiar, n afar de orele i cursurile prescrise de lege pentru a fi predate n romn. Dar, prea adesea, inspeciile revizorilor colari sunt prea exigente. Este, totui adevrat c statul ntreine pe propriile-i cheltuieli coli primare n limba maghiar; nu exist sate fr coli. El se mai plnge de dispoziia care interzice colilor diferitelor biserici s primeasc elevii unei alte confesiuni dect cea a colilor respective. Marea dificultate pe care biserica sa o ntmpin este lipsa mijloacelor financiare pentru a susine colile sale confesionale. El sper ca n urma pactului electoral ncheiat ntre guvernul Averescu i Partidul Maghiar3, guvernul va sprijini cheltuielile acestor coli. n general, el consider c antagonismul care a existat ntre elementul maghiar i cel romn, i, mai ales, ntre conductorii naltelor instituii ecleziastice maghiare din Transilvania i autoritile superioare ale statului romn a diminuat mult i este

pe cale de dispariie. Dac aceast nenelegere nu dispare mai repede, este din cauza stngciei i zelului exagerat al autoritilor inferioare ale statului. 3. La episcopul romano-catolic Bjelik La 11 1/2 se gsesc la episcopul romano-catolic Bjelik. El spune c statul nu pune nici un fel de piedici liberei funcionri a bisericii sale. n colile sale confesionale instrucia se face n limba maghiar, n afar de studiile prescrise de lege pentru a fi studiate n limba romn. Chiar i n colile de stat, religia se pred n limba matern a elevilor de ctre profesori desemnai de biserica lor. Se constat anumite dificulti n ntreinerea colilor din cauza exproprierilor pe scar larg la care biserica sa a fost supus. Dar guvernul i-a artat ntotdeauna bunvoin i cererile sale nu au fost refuzate niciodat. El crede, de altfel, c i ungurii, mai ales, efii lor ecleziastici i intelectualii de la orae i sate trebuie s dea dovada de loialitate fa de stat. El acioneaz n acest sens, sftuindu-i clerul s nvee romna, s aib ntotdeauna o atitudine conciliant i s triasc n bun nelegere cu autoritile i cu populaia romn i este fericit s constate c recomandrile sale au dat roade. 4. La rabinul Leopold Kesckemthy La prnz a avut loc o ntrevedere cu dl. Leopold Kecskemthy, rabin al evreilor neologi. El declar c, din punctul de vedere al exercitrii libere a religiei sale, comunitatea sa nu are nici o plngere de fcut. Dar evreii neologi din Oradea sunt mhnii din cauza colilor lor. Limba lor matern nu este ebraica sau idi, ci maghiara; de ce statul romn le impune, ca i celorlali evrei, ebraica sau idi, alturi de romna n colile lor confesionale? De ce nu accept ca limb de predare n aceste coli maghiara i romna? Ei ar fi mulumii dac colile lor ar fi bilingve, predndu-se n maghiar i romn. 5. La rabinul Benjamin Fuchs La ora 12 este o ntrevedere cu dl. Benjamin Fuchs, rabin al evreilor ortodoci. El declar c libertatea religioas nu este deloc ngrdit. El consider c situaia colilor i a nvmntului corespunde nevoilor i dorinelor populaiei. n ceea ce privete populaia evreiasc a sectei sale are o singur observaie de fcut, elevii evrei care frecventeaz colile de stat sunt obligai s scrie i s desemneze, adic s lucreze smbta, ceea ce legea religiei lor le interzice cu severitate. El ar dori ca aceast obligaie s nceteze, dar nu merge att de departe nct s cear ca elevii evrei s nu fie obligai s frecventeze coala smbta. Activitatea instituiilor evreieti ale sectei sale se desfoar n mod liber. 6. La liceul de stat La ora 3 dup-mas se viziteaz secia maghiar a liceului Samuil Gojdu, ntreinut pe cheltuiala statului. Secia este un liceu complet, cu 8 clase, cu predare n limba maghiar n ntregime. Directorul liceului, dl. Teodor Ne, conduce vizitatorii. Se intr n clasa a II-a. Profesorul, dl. Paul Jagics, maghiar, ine n maghiar cursul de matematic. Manualul folosit de el i de ctre elevi i care se vede n faa fiecrui elev din clas, este n maghiar: Mennyisgtani kziknyv s pldatr a kzp s iskolk I II osztlyai szmra. Irt Mester Mihy, reformtus fgmnziumi tanr (Cluj, 1925). Se trece n clasa a VIII-a, unde, condui de profesorul lor, dl. Gabriel Schroff, care este un fost clugr piarist, elevii traduc textele poeilor din latin n maghiar.

Se viziteaz apoi clasa a VII-a, unde profesorul, dl. Alexandru Nagy, maghiar, ine n maghiar cursul su de istorie universal. Elevii rspund n maghiar. n minile lor se gsete manualul n maghiar: Egyetemes trtenelem a kzpiskolk fels osztlyai szmra irtk Bir Vencel s Dr. Patay Jzsef (Cluj, 1922). 7. La coala primar i normal a Surorilor imaculate Vizitatorii sunt primii de maica superioar care este, n acelai timp, i directoarea instituiei i de ctre dou maici, ele nsele nvtoare. La ntrebrile puse de dl. Colban, ele l informeaz c coala primar are caracter public4, n timp ce coala normal are doar un caracter particular, predarea se face n maghiar, conform programei stabilite prin lege. Faptul c n clasele primare elevii fac anumite studii n romn nu-i mpiedic deloc s nvee s scrie i s citeasc corect n maghiar. 8. La Seleu i la Episcopia Bihorului Dup ce au vizitat localitile i parcurile staiunii termale Bile Felix i Bile Episcopiei, dl. Colban i nsoitorii si se opresc la Seleu, un sat mic cu populaie mixt, romn i maghiar. Dl. Colban le cere ranilor informaii despre reforma agrar care a avut loc n aceast localitate. Cea mai mare parte a ranilor i spune c au primit pmnt indiferent de originea etnic i c i-au fcut cu toii serviciul militar n timpul rzboiului n armata austro-ungar. Muli rani au primit teren pentru a-i construi case sau alte construcii agricole. Cea mai mare parte dintre ei, de-a lungul oselei, sunt deja instalai n noile lor locuine, iar la ntrebrile dl. Colban ei rspund c sunt de origine maghiar, c pmntul i terenul pentru locuine le-au fost date de ctre guvernul romn, c nu au avut terenuri nainte i c aceste pmnturi pe care le-au primit au fost expropriate din bunurile episcopiei [greco]-catolice romneti din Oradea Mare. n acelai timp, toi declar c n satul lor au o biseric i o coal maghiare. Revenind pe acelai drum i trecnd prin Oradea Mare, dl. Colban se duce spre sear la Episcopia Bihorului, lng frontiera maghiar. Ceea ce l intereseaz este aplicarea legii agrare. ranii care se gsesc n faa caselor lor recent construite, att pe lng osea ct i pe o strad complet nou, i declar c cei mai muli sunt de origine maghiar, c nainte de rzboi nu aveau pmnturi i case, c n timpul rzboiului au luptat n rndurile armatei austro-ungare, c, n ciuda acestui trecut i n ciuda originii lor, ei au primit pmnt n loturi de 3 acri (3 joch austrieci; romnete iugr) i teren pentru case i anexe agricole, c pmntul, nainte de reform, aparinea episcopiei catolice din Oradea Mare. Maghiarii declar c au o coal primar maghiar cu anumite obiecte de studiu n romn. II. AIUD 1. La colile calviniste Bethlen Sosesc n 24 octombrie la 6 dimineaa. Se viziteaz colile confesionale ale bisericii reformate calviniste, cu limba de predare maghiar: coala normal de biei, coala normal de fete, liceul i coala primar de pe lng coala normal. Directorul Aron Ferencz d explicaiile necesare. Instrucia se face n limba maghiar, n afar de materiile care, n virtutea legii, se predau n romn. Cataloagele claselor i registrele direciunii sunt bilingve. O parte din pmnturile i pdurile acestor instituii au fost expropriate (bunurile de mn-moart), le-au rmas 1. 500 de acri de pdure i 56 de acri de teren arabil, dar, de

curnd, Consiliul Superior al Reformei Agrare a hotrt s le mai restituie 1. 000 de acri de pdure i 100 de acri de pmnt arabil. Profesorii i nvtorii sunt toi maghiari calviniti. Cea mai mare parte dintre ei nu vorbesc deloc romna. Elevii, de asemenea, sunt n cea mai mare parte calviniti, n afar de un mic numr de catolici. Se viziteaz coala normal de biei. n clasa a II-a, profesorul Francisc Gyrgy ine un curs de gramatic maghiar (Sufixele). Manualul este: Magyar lvasoknyv s nyelvtani sszefoglals a kzpiskola II osztlya szmra, szerkesztette Kiss Em dr. , aprut la Kolozsvar [nu la Cluj], n 1922. n clasa a VI-a ora de fizic experimental a profesorului Sigismund Hegedu se pred n maghiar. Manualul este Kisrleti Fizika a kzp s polgariiskolak szmra irt Csefo andor (Cluj 1924). Se trece la coala normal de fete. Din cele 133 de eleve, toate maghiare, 109 sunt calviniste, 6 luterane, 4 unitariene, 14 romano-catolice. coala are 7 clase. Se intr la clasa a II-a, unde profesorul tefan Zalnyi i ine cursul de fizic, ntr-a II-a domnioara Lenka Mor ine cursul de igien i antropologie, ntr-a V-a d-na Maria Ajtoi pred limba i literatura maghiar. La coala primar de pe lng coala normal i care servete de coal de aplicaie se pred matematica. n toate aceste clase nvmntul se face n limba maghiar, numai n clasa a VI-a normal de fete, profesorul Victor Elekes ine, n limba romn, conform legii, cursul de Geografie a Romniei. La liceul calvinist, care este de asemenea vizitat, se asist la cursul de religie care se ine n maghiar de ctre profesorul Ioan Zajzen dup manualul: Akikre nem volt mlt a vilg, de Emeric Rvsz (Cluj 1921) i Reformatus egyhzi nekesknyv (editat de episcopul calvinist din Cluj, n 1923). n clasa a VII-a, profesorul Mathieu Marterot i face cursul de gramatic francez. Dl. Marterot este membru al misiunii de profesori francezi pe care guvernul romn i-a invitat n Romnia; el este n serviciul statului i pltit de ctre guvern. Acum autoritile superioare l-au pus la dispoziia acestei coli, pentru un anumit numr de ore pe sptmn, pentru ca elevii maghiari s-i poat nsui o bun pronunie francez. 2. La coala primar de stat din Aiud coala are o Secie romn (300 de elevi) i o Secie maghiar (144 de elevi). Directorul, dl. Ioan Kadar este maghiar. Secia maghiar are, n afar de director, i 4 nvtori (dintre care unul nu vorbete deloc romna), toi maghiari, nainte de Unire au fost cu toii n serviciul Statului maghiar, d-nii Ladislau Turczi, Martin Balogh (nlocuit temporar de Francisc Farkas), Denis Szcs i d-na Maria Szatmri. Vizitnd clasele, dl. Szcs este gsit prednd limba i literatura maghiar la clasele II-III dup manualul Az elemi iskolk II. osztlynak tanknyve de d-nii Szentptery-Haller i Mihai Gazdac (Deva, 1926), directorul Ioan Kadar prednd i el lectura maghiar la clasa a IV-a, dup un manual alctuit de aceiai autori. Directorul i nvtorii declar c limba de predare la secia maghiar este maghiara, cu excepia materiilor prescrise de lege, c religia este predat n maghiar de ctre profesori alei de chiar autoritile ecleziastice i faptul c anumite materii se predau n romn, ceea ce nu-i mpiedic deloc pe elevi s vorbeasc i s scrie bine n maghiar. 3. La Vinul de Sus n drumul spre Cluj, se face o oprire la coala primar de stat din Vinul de Sus. Ea are o secie romn (23 elevi) i o secie maghiar (160 de elevi). Predarea la aceasta se face n maghiar i n romn la materiile stabilite prin lege. Secia maghiar are 4 nvtori: d-nii Andrei Portik, Eugen Mtys, Rudolf Izsk, Iosif Katona. Religia este, de asemenea, predat n maghiar, de ctre preotul catolic Ladislau Kacs. Secia romn are ca director pe dl.

Nicolae Mrgineanu i nvtoare pe domnioara I. Vasilache; ea pred, n acelai timp, limba romn la secia maghiar, nvtorii acesteia nevorbind destul de bine limba romn. 4. La Turda La coala primar calvinist care este vizitat, se gsesc 140 de elevi, toi maghiari calviniti. Directorul, dl. Gheorghe Zalny i cele dou nvtoare Gizella Mesei i Iulia Kolumban, declar c predarea se face n limba maghiar, n afar de care se predau n romn, Geografia i Istoria Romniei, cum cere legea, c religia este i ea predat n maghiar i c elevii nva cu toii s scrie i s citeasc n limba matern, nu sunt deloc deranjai de studierea limbii romne, de care, de altfel, au mare nevoie . La coala primar de stat se gsete o secie maghiar cu 5 nvtori (200 de elevi) i o secie romn cu 8 nvtori. Declaraiile nvtorilor maghiari sunt aceleai ca cele ale nvtorilor din colile calviniste: elevii nva toi s scrie i s citeasc corect n limba maghiar. ntre coala de stat i cea calvinist exist relaii de prietenie sincer. III. CLUJ (25 26 octombrie) 1. La canonicul romano-catolic Andrei Balzs n 25 octombrie, ora 10 dimineaa, dl. Colban, nsoit de dl. Stoica, face o vizit la canonicul Andrei Balzs, eful departamentului colilor romano-catolice din Alba Iulia. Canonicul declar de la nceput c de la ultima sa ntrevedere cu dl. Colban s-a produs o mbuntire n situaia minoritii maghiare din Romnia. Guvernul generalului Averescu a fcut chiar un pact cu Partidul Maghiar al crui coninut dovedete mult bunvoin fa de colile maghiare. Din nefericire, directorii din minister i inspectorii interpreteaz toate dispoziiile n defavoarea colilor confesionale. Ei au tendina de a elimina colile confesionale i de a le nlocui prin coli de stat. n acest scop, legea se aplic cu o severitate extrem. Nu se admite n colile confesionale dect elevi avnd aceeai limb matern ca i a colilor. Evreii nu sunt admii s urmeze cursurile colilor catolice. Ei trebuie s se nscrie fie n colile de stat, fie n colile confesionale evreieti. De asemenea, inspectorii nu admit n colile confesionale maghiare elevi pe care ei i consider ca fiind de origine i limb matern romn. La examenul de bacalaureat s-a procedat cu prea mult severitate fa de elevii liceelor minoritare. ntre Legea nvmntului particular i regulamentul aplicrii sale sunt contradicii. Marea dificultate a colilor catolice este lipsa mijloacelor financiare: Cea mai urgent necesitate pentru noi este sprijinul din partea statului. Se sper ca n urma pactului stabilit ntre Partidul Maghiar i partidul de guvernmnt, bisericile maghiare s obin de la stat o subvenie pentru colile lor. 2. La episcopul calvinist Alexandru Makkay La ora 10 se merge la episcopul calvinist (reformat) Alexandru Makkay. Acesta, un brbat nc tnr, vorbete cu mult calm i cu un profund sim al realitii. Dup el, situaia minoritii maghiare s-a ameliorat mult, antagonismele au disprut aproape complet. Peste tot satele cu populaie maghiare au coli. O parte din aceste coli, dei de limb maghiar, sunt coli de stat. Biserica reformat depune toate eforturile pentru a-i susine colile. Dar situaia acestor coli este destul de precar din cauza lipsei de fonduri, iar parohiile nu pot s-i impun sacrifici mai mari. Sunt n tratative cu guvernul i sper s obin o subvenie. Guvernul actual a creat o atmosfer foarte propice pentru o nelegere. El nelege situaia

minoritii maghiare i a artat mult bunvoin: se sper c autoritile inferioare vor urma exemplul celor superioare. Evident, a fost greu s se elimine toate nenelegerile n scurtul timp care s-a scurs de la primul rzboi mondial pn n aceast zi. La aa ceva se ajunge n mod treptat. Poporul maghiar i poporul romn, marile mase, de fapt oamenii obinuii, triesc ntr-o armonie complet. Autoritile statului, peste tot unde episcopul s-a prezentat, pentru a-i vizita enoriaii, i-au dat tot concursul lor. Vrem s pstrm intacte libertile noastre religioase i instituiile noastre i vrem s obinem o subvenie pentru colile noastre; dar vrem s ne nelegem cu statul romn i s ne ncadrm n viaa lui i vrem s ne rezolvm problemele noastre aici, n ara noastr, i s-a spus lui Colban. 3. La episcopul unitarian Iosif Ferencz La 11 a avut loc o ntrevedere cu episcopul Iosif Ferencz, eful bisericii unitariene. El repet, cu un aer obosit, cteva din plngerile formulate deja de canonicul Balsz. El admite totui c o anumit ameliorare s-a produs. 4. La preedintele comunitii evreieti, Felix Adler La prnz este o ntlnire cu preedintele comunitii evreieti, Felix Adler. El constat c situaia se amelioreaz repede, att din punct de vedere economic, ct i din punct de vedere etnic i c guvernul arat o mare solicitudine pentru nevoile minoritilor etnice, inclusiv evrei. Din punct de vedere religios, evreii se bucur de libertate absolut, colile talmudice nu sunt ngrdite n funcionarea lor de nici un fel de restricii sau icane. El nu are dect o plngere de formulat: printr-o aplicare sever a legii, ministerul a retras caracterul de coal public, dar el este pe cale s-l obin din nou. 5. La dl. George Bethlen, preedintele Partidului Maghiar La 12 se face o vizit domnului G. Bethlen, preedintele Partidului Maghiar i curator al bisericii calviniste din Transilvania. Dl. Colban i explic scopurile Societii Naiunilor n ceea ce privete problema minoritilor etnice. Dl. Bethlen constat c s-au produs ameliorri sensibile n Romnia n acest sens i prezint cteva observaii n ceea ce privete aplicarea prea sever a legii fa de colile confesionale i, mai ales, lipsa de fonduri pentru funcionarea lor. El sper c pactul pe care partidul su l-a fcut cu generalul Averescu va aduce rezultate n aceast privin i c guvernul nu va refuza o subvenie pentru aceste coli. 6. La Rscruci (Valasut) coala primar de stat are o secie maghiar (57 de elevi) i o secie romn (112 elevi). Secia maghiar are o nvtoare, d-na Gizella Bader, secia romn pe dl. Al. Murean i d-oara Marioara Atileanu. Predarea la secia maghiar se face n limba maghiar, d-na Bader nevorbind romna. n clasele a II-a i a III-a se gsete acelai manual, pe care l-au gsit i la Aiud: Az elemi iskolk II. osztnak tanknyve de dl. Szentptery-Haller i dl. Gzdac. 7. La Bonida coala primar de stat are o secie romn (nvtori Ioan Corpodean, Elena Iacobescu i Margareta Rotenbiller) i o secie maghiar (nvtori Ladislaz Kelemen i Francisc Flp (care nu vorbete romn) n serviciul bisericii catolice. nvtorii, ranii i notarul satului, dl. Jacques Roth, de asemenea maghiar, declar c a existat n sat i o coal primar

calvinist dar c enoriaii au refuzat s continue s o susin i au decis s o nchid i s-i trimit copiii la coala de stat (a se vedea memoriul Protecia minoritilor n Romnia, prezentat de dl. Comnen la 1 decembrie 1925, p. 119)5. n drum spre Bonida i la primria satului se constat c la Bonida, ca i la Rscruci, mprirea pmntului ca urmare a legii agrare s-a fcut fr cea mai mic difereniere dup origine etnic, limb sau religie i c ranii care au obinut pmnt i teren pentru a-i construi case sunt toi foti soldai ai armatei austro-ungare. 8. La Cojocna La cderea serii se viziteaz coala romano-catolic. Preotul declar c limba de predare este maghiara, c elevii nu sunt mpiedicai prin studiul limbii romne s nvee s scrie i s citeasc corect n maghiar i c coala nu are dificulti de ordin material. 9. La Svdisla coala primar de stat, instalat ntr-o cldire excelent, este o coal complet maghiar. Ea are trei nvtori maghiari (Ladislau Szkely, Jolankd Modorcsa-Jakab i Madeleine Dsi) i o nvtoare romnc, d-oara Julieta Gherman care pred limba romn. Cei civa elevi romni ai satului frecventeaz aceast coal i i fac studiile primare n maghiar (vezi memoriul citat, p. 121). Parohia calvinist susine o coal confesional cu 91 de elevi i 2 nvtori, dl. tefan Kolumban i d-na Elena Debreceni. Toate clasele sunt ngrmdite ntr-o camer mic i insalubr, fr lumin. nvtorul lucreaz fr autorizaia statului. La primrie i la pretur se constat, cu ajutorul documentelor oficiale puse la dispoziia dlui Colban de ctre preotul A. Goa i secretarul acestuia, dl. Emeric Meszaros (un maghiar), c n urma reformei agrare s-a dat pmnt la 81 de rani din acest sat, care sunt maghiari cu toii i numai la 3 funcionari romni le-a fost dat teren pentru a-i construi case. 10. La Vlaha Se constat c exist o coal de stat cu 4 nvtori i cu limba de predare maghiar. nvtorii sunt maghiari care au funcionat n aceast calitate i n fostul regim (vezi memoriu citat, p. 119). Informaiile i sunt date dlui Colban de ctre rani, de directorul Zoltan Benedek i nvtorul Iosif Teleki. 11. La Luna coala primar de stat are o secie maghiar i o secie romn cu cte doi nvtori fiecare. nvtorii de la secia maghiar sunt maghiari, dl. Carol Kutas, care a funcionat timp de 18 ani ca nvtor la coala maghiar din Zam Sn-Crai, n serviciul statului maghiar i d-oara Etelka Kovcs. Ei declar c predarea la secia lor se face n limba maghiar i c nvarea limbii romne nu este duntoare deloc nvrii limbii materne a elevilor. IV. SIGHIOARA ODORHEI (26 octombrie) 1. La Sighioara Primarul oraului Sighioara, dl. Leonhard, declar c n ora populaia triete ntr-o total armonie i c nici o minoritate nu este persecutat. La primria oraului majoritatea funcionarilor sunt sai; din 26 de funcionari, 22 sunt sai i 4 romni. n ceea ce privete

colile, fiecare minoritate are propriile sale coli confesionale. Ungurii au dou coli primare cu limba de predare maghiar, o coal catolic i una calvinist. Saii care sunt cu toii luterani, au coli primare, un liceu, o coal secundar de fete, o coal normal de fete. A existat o coal de stat cu limba de predare maghiar, dar elevii au trecut la colile confesionale, iar cei doi nvtori maghiari, domnii Eugen Schlachtner i Fenkled Sieghart, au fost repartizai la serviciul Revizoratului colar judeean. Prin documentele oficiale i informaiile pe care le dau dlui. Colban prefectul, dl. Aurel Popa i secretarul judeului, dl. Frederic Walter, el nsui german, se constat c dintre cei 26 de funcionari superiori ai administraiei centrale a judeului Trnava Mare, numai 13 sunt romni i c din cei 110 notari steti din jude 44 sunt sai, 16 maghiari i numai 50 romni (Mem., X, p. 129). 2. La Albeti Se constat c exist o coal confesional maghiar cu un nvtor (dl. Sipos) i 20 de elevi, ntreinui de biserica calvin. 3. La Hasfalu (Vntori) coala primar de stat are o secie romn cu doi nvtori i o secie maghiar cu o nvtoare (d-oara Margareta Vmszer). Exist, de asemenea, o coal primar calvinist, cu limb de predare maghiar (v. mem. cit., p. 123). 4. La Secuieni coala de stat este o coal maghiar cu doi nvtori, d-nii Andrei Horvth i Petru Fazekas, care sunt amndoi maghiari. 5. La Bodogaia coala de stat are o secie maghiar cu doi nvtori i 70 de elevi. nvtorii sunt: dl. Samuel Pap i d-na Maria Pap-Szke, soia sa. Domnul Pap este n acelai timp cantor al bisericii maghiare calvine i al bisericii unitariene. D-na Pap-Szke declar c limba de nvmnt la secia lor este maghiara, c religia este predat n maghiar de ctre pastori, c nvarea limbii romne nu-i mpiedic pe elevi s nvee corect limba lor matern. 6. La Cristur Exist 3 coli primare maghiare, ntreinute de biserici: o coal calvinist, cu un nvtor, o coal romano-catolic, cu doi nvtori i una unitarian cu doi nvtori. Mai exist un liceu maghiar de confesiune unitarian. Predarea n toate colile sale se face n maghiar, n afar de cursurile n romn prevzute de lege. Exist, de asemenea, o coal romn de stat, cu limba de predare romn. Totui n aceast coal se pred maghiara o or pe zi n fiecare clas. Este interesant de constatat c la aceste coli i trimit copiii intelectualii maghiari, cei mai distini ai oraului: doctorul Viola, aristocraii Denis Elekes i Gabriel Ferenczi, directorul de banc Nicolae Szakcs, profesorii liceului unitar maghiar, Geza Lorinczy i Francisc Szolga. 7. La Beteti Se constat c exist o coal maghiar calvinist cu un profesor (dl. George Kinda) i 50 de elevi.

8. La Oeni coala de stat este o coal complet maghiar cu 3 nvtori maghiari; dl. Moise Vida, care este directorul i doamnele Elisabeta Tams i Emilia Molnar-Tams. Dl. Vida a funcionat n acest sat ca nvtor al statului maghiar timp de 20 de ani. n 1919 a fost fondat n acest sat o coal confesional calvin al crei director a devenit. Dar coala era ru aezat, nghesuit ntr-o camer mic, foarte slab dotat i chiar urma vechea program a statului maghiar. Parohia neavnd mijloace pentru a susine nevoile colii dup lege, ea a fost desfiinat n anul 1923 i dl. Vida a trecut, n calitate de director, la coala de stat. 9. La Feliceni Se constat existena unei coli de stat, cu limba de predare maghiar, cu un nvtor maghiar, dl. Aladar Molnr. 10. La Martinus (Mrtini) Se constat existena unei coli de stat cu limba de predare maghiar, cu nvtori maghiari: dl. Albert Bet i d-na Monica Mozes-Molnar, soia pastorului maghiar al satului. 11. La Vleni Se constat existena unei coli de stat n limba maghiar. nvtorul este dl. Guillaume (Vilmos), un maghiar. 12. La Arveni Preedintele comitetului colar, dl. Moise Pter l informeaz pe dl. Colban c coala aparine statului, c predarea se face n maghiar, c nu exist dect 12 elevi i c nvtoarea este d-oara Bske Csiky. V. ODORHEI SFNTUL GHEORGHE BRAOV (27 octombrie) 1. La Odorhei n ceea ce privete educaia primar se constat c pentru populaia maghiar exist mai multe coli primare confesionale i anume: o coal romano-catolic de biei, o coal romano-catolic de fete, o coal romano-catolic mixt, o coal calvinist, grdini romano-catolic. coala calvinist a fost fondat n 1022. Dl. Anton Szabo, nvtor la coala catolic de fete i d aceste informaii dlui Colban i adaug: este destul loc n aceste coli pentru toi copiii maghiari din ora. n micul ora exist, de asemenea, o coal primar de biei, o coal primar de fete i o grdini, susinute de stat cu limba de predare romna. n fiecare clas se preda totui o or n limba maghiar. Informaiile oficiale demonstreaz c primarul A. J. este maghiar, c printre funcionarii primriei exist 20 de maghiari i 3 romni, c printre funcionarii administraiei centrale ai judeului Odorhei se gsesc 35 de maghiari i 3 romni. La Palatul de Justiie, de asemenea, exist 8 judectori maghiari i 7 romni. Despre cele 99 de coli de stat din jude, 92 au limb de predare limba maghiar i numai 7 limba romn. Dintre nvtorii de stat 167 sunt maghiari i numai 17 sunt romni. n anul colar 1925 1926 statul a construit n jude 22 de cldiri, toate pentru coli cu limba de predare maghiar.

2. La Rare Se constat existena unei coli de stat, cu limba de predare maghiar, al crui nvtor este dl. Francisc Albert, un maghiar. 3. La Sn-Paul Se constat, de asemenea, c coala de stat este o coal maghiar. Cei doi nvtori, dl. Acosh Palfi i d-oara Elena Bence sunt maghiari. Dl. Palfy este nvtor la aceast coal de 12 ani. Am aflat de la dl. Palfy detalii asupra modului n care dl. Cornish i-a adunat informaiile la Sn-Paul6; vicarul Boros s-a prezentat n sat i a invitat la o conferin preoii din mprejurimi. 19 preoi au luat parte la aceast conferin. Dl. Cornish s-a prezentat dou zile dup aceea, nsoit de dr. Csiky i dr. Elek Kiss (care este n prezent la Budapesta), care i-au servit de translatori. Preoii care s-au prezentat la dl. Cornish au fost aceiai care au luat parte la conferina vicarului Boros. 4. La Ocland Exist o coal de stat n limba maghiar. coala are 58 de elevi i un nvtor, dl. Francisc Szke. Exist, de asemenea, o coal primar unitarian, fr drept de publicitate. coala nu are dect 20 de elevi, marea majoritate a copiilor din sat urmnd cursurile colii de stat, dar are doi nvtori. Ea nu a existat nainte de rzboi. Elevii sunt ngrmdii ntr-o camer insalubr. nvtorii, dl. Charles Vaida i d-na Elena Bed-Szigeti declar cu pasiune c n colile de stat elevii nu nva s citeasc i s scrie corect n limba romn a anumitor materii stabilite prin lege i mpiedic elevii maghiari s vorbeasc bine limba lor. coala a avut necazuri n acest an. Fiind o coal particular, elevii au trecut examenul n faa unei comisii de stat i n acelai timp au trebuit s se conformeze programei ei oficiale care le-a fost comunicat de revizori. Direciunea colii a refuzat s se conformeze programei i s admit prezena comisiei de stat la examenele din iunie. Consecina a fost c examenul a fost declarat nul i c elevii au trebuit s se prezinte la un nou examen n 17 septembrie i care nu a fost trecut dect de un numr foarte mic dintre ei. Pastorul unitarian Francisc Pl care i ofer d-lui Colban aceste informaii adaug c parohia i coala au acionat astfel dup instruciunile pe care le-au primit de la Consistoriul unitarian din Cluj. 5. La Vrghi coala de stat, cu 3 nvtori, este romneasc, dar este frecventat nu numai de elevi romni, ci i maghiari. Maghiarii nu au cerut crearea unei coli de stat n limba maghiar. Ei au o coal confesional unitarian cu 3 nvtori pentru 39 de elevi: dnii Carol Kiss, care este directorul ei, d-na Bertha Kiss i Elisabeta Kiss-Osvth. Limba de predare este maghiara. Se intr n clasa a II-a; d-na Kiss-Osvth pred matematica n maghiar. 6. La Tlioara Se constat c exist o coal de stat avnd ca limb de predare maghiara. D-na Irma Becsak-Keresztes, nvtoarea, declar c director este soul su, dl. Ion Becsak, c sunt amndoi maghiari i c sunt 91 de elevi, printre care se gsete un romn. 7. La Baraolt

Se constat c exist o coal de stat n limba maghiar i o coal confesional catolic. coala de stat pe care o viziteaz are 4 nvtori, dintre care 3 maghiari, dl. Eugen Gspr, care este directorul, dl. Andrei Lszl, d-oara Beatrice Molnr i un romn, dl. Ioan erban, care pred romna. Dl. Gspr este n acelai timp dirijorul maghiar al orelului. El declar c predarea limbii romne nu este o piedic pentru predarea limbii materne. coala are 135 de elevi, printre care 5 romni. coala catolic, de asemenea, are 4 nvtori, maghiari cu toii: dl. Iuliu Incze, care este directorul, d-nii Ludovic Nagy, Moise Tako i d-na Isabella Lszl-Kiss, elevii tiu s scrie i s citeasc foarte bine n limba lor matern, n ciuda nvrii limbii romne. Informaiile sunt confirmate i completate de preotul Gspr Botr. 8. La Biboreni Se constat c coala de stat cu doi nvtori are ca limb de predare maghiara, c directorul ei este un maghiar, dl. Arpd Mt. 9. La Banii Mari Exist o coal de stat care are o secie romn cu un nvtor, dl. Constantin Boeriu i o secie maghiar cu 5 nvtori: Wilhelm Borbt, director, Paul Nagy, Adalbert Zsigmond, Zoltn Zsigmond i doamna Dalma Borbt. Dl. Borbt declar c el triete n acest sat de 30 de ani i c sub fostul regim a fost tot nvtor, n serviciul statului maghiar. Predarea limbii romne nu-i mpiedic deloc pe elevi s nvee s citeasc i s scrie bine n maghiar. De altfel, copiii i prinii sunt foarte mulumii c nva romna, pentru c secuii, care i caut deseori de lucru n oraele de peste muni au mare nevoie de ea. n sat mai exist o coal reformat, dar ea este instalat ntr-o barac gata s se prbueasc; dl. Colban i nsoitorii si s-au fotografiat n faa acestei coli. 10. La Micflu Exist o coal de stat cu limba de predare romna i o coal de stat cu limba maghiar. Aceasta din urm are dou nvtoare maghiare: d-nele Vilva Kerekes i Elena Mark. 11. La Malna Exist o coal de stat n limba maghiar. nvtorii sunt dl. Iosif Czintos i soia lui, maghiari amndoi. Parohia calvinist susine o coal confesional cu 3 nvtori. Directorul care este n acelai timp pastorul calvinist al satului, declar c instrucia se face n maghiar i c predarea limbii romne nu mpiedic deloc buna nvare a limbii maghiare. 12. La Olteni Se constat c exist dou coli maghiare: o coal de stat, avnd ca nvtor pe dl. Gabriel Vitalyos, i o coal calvinist avnd ca nvtor pe dl. Bla Fazekas. 13. La Sfntu-Gheorghe coala primar de stat care se viziteaz are o secie romn cu 3 nvtori i o secie maghiar cu 8 nvtori care sunt toi maghiari: tefan Gyrgybir, Iosif Pap, Ludovic Kirly, Irina Csiky, Elisabeta Szsz, Elisabeta Rendek, Juliana Muscalu, Elena Lszl. Dl. Ludovic Kirly i d-na Elena Lszl predau n mahalaua Semeria. Conform informaiilor date de nvtorii Ludovic Kirly i Irina Csiky predarea se face n maghiar cu excepia studiului limbii romne stabilit prin lege. Elevii nu sunt deloc mpiedicai prin nvarea limbii romne

s scrie i s citeasc corect n limba lor matern. Toi nvtorii au funcionat n aceast calitate la colile de stat maghiare, nainte de rzboi. Se mai viziteaz coala primar catolic a Surorilor franciscane. Directorul ei este preotul Carol Szkely, cele trei nvtoare sunt surorile Carine Marie Fieger, Gustavina Oeffenberger i Angeline Marie Hpfner. Surorile declar c limba de predare n coala lor este maghiara, c elevii sunt n cea mai mare parte catolici, dar c printre ei se afl i un numr de calviniti i unitarieni, c elevii nva cu plcere limba romn i c prin nvarea ei elevii nu sunt deloc mpiedicai s nvee s scrie i s citeasc corect n maghiar. Profesorii liceului maghiar calvinist, Teodor Andrssy, Victor Daniel i Albert Szs informeaz pe dl. Colban despre instituia lor. La ntrebarea dlui Colban dac elevii colilor primare sunt destul de bine pregtii la intrarea lor n liceu profesorul Daniel declar c elevii provenind din colile confesionale maghiare sunt bine pregtii, dimpotriv, cei care provin din colile de stat nu sunt pentru c n aceste coli studiul limbii maghiare este zurckgedrangt. La ntrebarea dac poate preciza cazuri sau coli maghiare de stat unde studiul maghiarei ar fi att de neglijat, el rspunde c nu are date exacte asupra acestei probleme. Primarul oraului, dl. Gabriel Kovsznay, maghiar el nsui, declar c dintre cei 24 de funcionari ai oraului numai 6 sunt romni, ceilali 18 fiind maghiari. Se mai constat faptul c dintre cei 54 de notari ai satelor judeului Trei Scaune nu exist dect 3 romni, n timp ce ceilali 51 sunt maghiari. 14. La Braov Pastorul Georg Scherg, care a fost contactat i apoi vizitat n casa sa, declar c populaia germano-sseasc are propriile sale coli confesionale unde germana este predat n toat libertatea. Ei se bucur de o libertate religioas complet. De altfel, aceast minoritate este profund loial statului neavnd congeneri crora ar putea s li se alture; nu are de altfel nici un motiv s se uite dincolo de graniele rii. Totui legea d-lui Angelescu le-a adus necazuri; limba matern este prea zurckgersangt (trecut pe plan secundar) de ctre limba oficial de stat. Dar ministrul Petrovici pare s aib mai mult nelegere pentru minoritatea sseasc. Este normal s nu poi mulumi pe toat lumea ntr-o perioad de tranziie. Populaia german, peste tot unde locuiete, poate s-i foloseasc liber limba n faa autoritilor. El afirm c tinerii sai, dup ce i-au trecut bacalaureatul, au dificulti n a fi primii n colile de ofieri de rezerv i c a fost desfiinat Consiliul municipal de ctre guvern. Aceste dou informaii sunt dezminite n aceeai sear de ctre dl. Emil Neugeboren, unul din conductorii sailor din Transilvania. Se viziteaz coala cu limba de predare romn. Frumosul edificiu a aparinut parohiei ortodoxe romne, dar a fost pus la dispoziia statului de ctre parohie. n seara de 27 octombrie se pleac la Bucureti, iar a doua zi suntem n capital7. Se viziteaz cola secundar de fete susinut de biserica sseasc luteran, unde directorul Adolf Meschendrfer, un om de cultur bine cunoscut ia dat lui Colban informaiile necesare. S-a trecut apoi la coala primar sseasc, unde n clasa a I-a s-a asistat la orele domnioarei Dora Teutsch. n privina nvmntului maghiar din Braov se constat c sunt 4 coli primare confesionale: 2 coli romano catolice, 1 coal calvinist i o coal luteran. Toi nvtorii din aceste coli sunt maghiari i predau n limba maghiar. Sunt, de asemenea, 2 coli secundare (civile) catolice, un liceu catolic i o coal superioar de comer susinute de biserica calvinist.

Dintre colile primare de stat, colile nr. 2, 3 i 4 au secii maghiare, alturi de secii romneti. Secia maghiar de la coala nr. 2 are 2 nvtori: Victor Olah i Petru Pop, cea de la coala nr. 3, are un nvtor pe Francisc Nagy i cea de la coala nr. 4 are 2 nvtori: pe domnioarele: Etelka Casato i Elena Preisszner. Toi aceti nvtori sunt maghiari; nvmntul n seciile lor se face n maghiar. 15. La Rnov ntorcndu-ne de la Bran, ne-am oprit la Rnov i am constatat c n aceast comun se afl o mare coal luteran, n care limba de predare este germana. 16. La Cristian Se viziteaz cola cu limba de predare romn. Frumosul edificiu a aparinut parohiei ortodoxe romne, dar, a fost pus la dispoziia statului de ctre parohie. n seara de 27 octombrie se pleac spre Bucureti, iar a doua zi eram n capital7.
NOTE 1. Cteva pagini din document sunt publicate n limba romn de Adrian Nstase, p. 398-402. M. Iacobescu doar amintete aceast vizit. Activitatea, p. 206. Lucrurile au fost notate de Vasile Stoica. La 30 noiembrie 1926, ministrul de externe Ion Mitilineu i directorul Seciei de Pres din minister Ion Lupacu i-au trimis dou exemplare cu acest text lui N. Petrescu-Comnen, la Geneva. Prin el, la 9 decembrie, documentul a ajuns la E. Colban care, la 11 decembrie 1926, l ntiina despre primirea lui. Arh. Minist. de Externe al Romniei, fond. Geneva, dosar 213, f. 118-128, 129. 2. Episcopia calvinist de Oradea a fost creat de statul romn n anul 1926 din parohiile care aparinuser pn atunci episcopiei de Debreczen. 3. Acord politic ncheiat n anul 1926. 4. Dreptul de a organiza examene la sfrit de an colar. 5. Protection des minorits en Roumanie. Observations du Gouvernement roumain la ptition supplmentaires des Eglises reforme, unitaire et catholique de Transylvanie au sujet de projet de Loi roumain sur lenseignement priv, 1925. 6. The religious minorities in Transilvania. Compiled by Louis C. Cornish, The Beacon Press, Inc. Boston, 1925. Este o carte cu un coninut mai puin obinuit. Pe partea stng a paginii sunt alegaiile delegaiei unitariene anglo-americane care a vizitat multe localiti. Pe cea dreapt sunt rspunsurile la obiect ale guvernului romn i care, n multe cazuri, contrazic opiniile vizitatorilor. Vezi i Gh. Iancu, Chestiunea, p. 165-176. 7. Este evident c numrul colilor i al seciilor maghiare de stat este destul de mare. Profesorii i nvtorii erau maghiari. Unii dintre ei, la peste 7 ani de la Unire, nu tiau limba romn i totui nu-i pierduser posturile. Redm n continuare doar numele ziarelor i numerele n care au aprut asemenea articole: Universul, nr. 246 din 23 octombrie 1926; Patria, nr. 234 din 24 octombrie, nr. 238 din 30 octombrie, nr. 239 din 31 octombrie 1926; ndreptarea, nr. 249 din 28 octombrie, nr. 250 din 29 octombrie, nr. 251 din 30 octombrie, nr. 252 din 31 octombrie 1926; Viitorul, nr. 5600 din 28 octombrie, nr. 5601 din 29 octombrie, nr. 5602 din 30 octombrie, nr. 5603 din 31 octombrie 1926; LIndpendance Roumaine, no. 15465, le 27 Octobre, no. 15467, le 29 Octobre, no. 15468, le 30 Octobre 1926; j Kelet, nr. 231 din 22 octombrie, nr. 233 din 25 octombrie 1926.

4. PABLO AZCARATE CONFIDENTIAL

VOYAGE EN ROUMANIE OCTOBRE 1930

1. Le but du voyage, tel quil avait t fix Genve avec la Dlgation roumaine, a t exclusivement dentrer en contact personnel avec les organes chargs dans lAdministration roumaine de lexamen des questions des minorits, ainsi quavec les personnes responsables de la politique du Gouvernement roumain en cette matire. Ds mon arrive Bucarest jai expliqu dans ce sens le caractre et la signification de ma visite, explication qui a t tout de suite comprise et apprcie. Au cours de la semaine que je suis rest Bucarest, jai eu de nombreux entretiens avec les personnes qui, soit dans lAdministration, soit dans le Gouvernement, soccupent dune manire spciale de la question des minorits en Roumanie. (La liste de ces personnes figure comme annexe au prsent rapport). Jai eu aussi lhonneur dtre reu par le Roi Sinaia. Quoi que jaie eu exclusivement des contacts avec des personnalits officielles, je peux dire que le but de mon voyage a t pleinement atteint, puisque, dun ct, il ma permis dtablir des relations personnelles qui certainement rendront plus efficace le travail de la Section des Minorits, et que, de lautre ct, jai pu me rendre compte directement de certains aspects particuliers que prsente actuellement la question des minorits en Roumanie, et quil serait injuste et dangereux de ne pas prendre suffisamment en considration. 2. Jai eu limpression que les questions des minorits ont t rcemment dplaces du Ministre des Affaires trangres la Prsidence du Conseil des Ministres, et, pour autant quelles se rfrent aux questions scolaires, au Ministre de lInstruction publique. La Section de la Socit des Nations au Ministre des Affaires trangres est devenue, en ce qui concerne les questions des minorits, un organe plutt de transmission entre le gouvernement et la Lgation roumaine auprs de la Socit des Nations. Lorganisme qui centralise les questions des minorits est le Bureau dEtudes pour les Questions des Minorits, cr par M. Maniu la Prsidence du Conseil des Ministres. Le Ministre de lInstruction publique soccupe de manire trs spciale des questions concernant les coles et les cultes minoritaires. Je voudrais mentionner que le Sous-Secrtaire dEtat actuel dans ce ministre, M. Popp, a une profonde connaissance de la question des minorits en Roumanie, et prte cette question une attention trs particulire et une partie considrable de son temps. Cette considration peut, du reste, stendre lensemble de lAdministration roumaine actuelle. A la Prsidence du Conseil de Ministres, au Ministre de lInstruction publique, au Ministre de lIntrieur partout, jai senti quil y avait une forte pousse dintrt pour la question des minorits, et je dois galement constater que, dune manire gnrale, les hommes qui dirigent actuellement la politique minoritaire du Gouvernement roumain mont sembl tre anims dun large esprit de comprhension du problme, et de beaucoup de bonne volont pour le rsoudre. 3. Depuis larrive au pouvoir de M. Maniu il a t question en Roumanie de llaboration dun statut gnral des minorits. M. Popp, actuellement Sous-Secrtaire dEtat au Ministre de lInstruction publique, avait t lanne dernire charge par M. Maniu de faire un voyage dtudes dans les diffrents pays ayant des engagements minoritaires, afin dobtenir la documentation ncessaire pour pouvoir ensuite rdiger le statut gnral de minorits quil avait lintention de soumettre au Parlement. M. Popp, aprs avoir parcouru les pays de lEurope centrale et les pays baltiques, rentra en Romanie, et plusieurs reprises il fut question, soit dans la presse, soit dans des dclarations officieuses du Gouvernement, de llaboration dun statut gnral des minorits. Ce projet a provoqu un intrt considrable dans les milieux minoritaires de Roumanie et dautres pays, et il a t souvent lobjet de commentaires dans la presse qui sintresse dune manire spciale ces questions. Ds mes

premiers entretiens Bucarest jai eu limpression que lide de faire un statut gnral des minorits, si elle na pas t compltement abandonne, se trouve au moins en suspens. M. Popp, lui-mme, sans doute le plus ardent partisan de cette ide, a soulign au cours de nos entretiens les grosses difficults qui se sont prsentes pour llaboration de ce statut, dcoulant dun ct de la diversit des situations dans lesquelles se trouvent les diffrentes minorits, et de lautre de limpossibilit de procder une telle mesure sans tre daccord avec les autres Etats signataires dengagements minoritaires. M. Popp ma clairement laiss comprendre que le gouvernement, dans ces conditions, avait d renoncer lide de soumettre au Parlement le statut en question dans un dlai rapproch. Cette impression me fut confirme par M. Mironesco lui-mme. Il me dclara que, lorsqu loccasion de son sjour Cluj, quelques jours avant, on lui avait demand quelle tait la situation ce sujet, il avait d nettement rpondre que les tudes ntaient pas suffisamment avances pour rendre possible au gouvernement de prsenter au Parlement un projet de statut. Personnellement, je crois que les difficults rencontres pour la rdaction du statut ne sont que trs relles, et je mexplique par consquent que le Gouvernement actuel se soit vu forc de mettre les choses au point en faisant comprendre quil se trouve dans limpossibilit de soumettre, pour le moment, un projet quelconque au Parlement. Dautre part, je crains, et je nai pas cach mes sentiments Bucarest, que cette attitude du Gouvernement ne puisse donner lieu une dception dans les milieux minoritaires, ayant comme consquence des attaques contre la politique du gouvernement roumain ce sujet. 4. Jai eu nettement limpression quune des causes principales des difficults actuelles en ce qui concerne la question des minorits en Roumanie est qu tort ou raison le gouvernement, les autorits et, je pense, aussi lopinion publique, considrent que les campagnes et les activits de quelques-unes des minorits, et notamment de la minorit hongroise, visent non pas obtenir une amlioration de la situation de la minorit, ou des minorits, en question, mais plutt maintenir un tat dagitation, dinquitude et de mcontentement, afin de produire ltranger limpression que le statut territorial actuel ne peut pas se conserver, et quil faut par consquent songer une rvision des frontires. Cette ide quun lien troit existe entre lattitude et la propagande de certaines minorits et la campagne rvisionniste se trouve aujourdhui au premier plan dans tous les esprits de ceux qui soccupent en Roumanie des questions minoritaires. Pendant mon sjour Bucarest le Parti hongrois de Roumanie a tenu un congrs Satu-Mare (Transylvanie), et, daprs ce quon ma dit Bucarest, le Comte Georges Bethlen, Prsident du Parti, aurait dit dans son discours que la Transylvanie ferait de nouveau partie de la Hongrie, dans un dlai moins long que ce quon pourrait penser. Ce discours provoqua la plus dplorable impression dans les milieux officiels du Gouvernement roumain. On se demandait comment il serait possible damener lopinion publique roumaine acepter une politique de conciliation vis-a-vis dune minorit dont le Chef tenait publiquement un pareil langage*. Chaque fois quon ma parl de cet aspect de la question, et je crois quil ny a pas une seule personne qui ny ait pas fait rfrence, jai exprim lavis quil faudrait viter que la protection des minorits par la Socit des Nations soit utilise comme un instrument dagitation politique dans un but autre que le respect et lexcution integrale et complte des stipulations des traits des minorits. Jai dit que lattitude des gouvernements exigeant de la part des minorits une parfaite loyaut vis-a-vis de lEtat recontrerait de toute vidence lappui des diffrents organes de la Socit des Nations appels intervenir en matire de la protection des minorits, mais jai ajout

que, pour quune pareille attitude puisse trouver cet appui, il faut que les gouvernements puissent montrer clairement quils ont rempli intgralement leurs obligations daprs les traits, et que les griefs formuls par les minorits ce sujet sont mal fonds. La situation serait tout--fait diffrente si un gouvernement invoquant lattitude dloyale des minorits se croyait dispens dappliquer leur egard mme les stipulations strictes des traits de minorits. Jai beaucoup insist, notamment auprs de M. Tilea, pour que, dans les observations qui seront prsentes lavenir au sujet de diffrentes ptitions, le gouvernement explique, dune manire aussi nette et franche que possible, quelle est la situation en ce qui concerne lattitude politique gnrale de la minorit en question. Dune manire gnrale jai toujours soulign que les ptitions offrent aux gouvernements des occasions de sexpliquer, et ceci sans etre forcs de prendre linitiative, ce qui, parfois, pourrait paratre suspect. M. Tilea ma remerci de mes indications, et ma annonc quil ne manquerait pas de prendre les mesures ncessaires pour quon en tienne compte dans la prparation des observations que le Gouvenement roumain pourrait tre appel formuler lavenir. Jai attir galement lattention de M. Tilea sur lintrt que peut prsenter pour les gouvernements la disposition de la rsolution de Madrid concernant la publicit du rsultat de par les Comitets des Minorits.
________________

* M. Tilea, Sous-Secretaire dEtat la Prsidence du Conseil des Ministres qui ma particulirement entretenu ce sujet, ma annonc lenvoi des discours prononcs ce congrs, ainsi que les rsolutions y adoptes. Jai mentionn la minorit hongroise comme tant celle au sujet de laquelle les difficults naissant du lien entre les deux ides de protection des minorits et de rvision des frontires sont les plus aigus. Par contre, lattitude de la minorit allemande ma sembl tre considre, sous ce rapport, comme satisfaisante. Jai eu limpression que les relations entre les chefs de cette minorit et les hommes qui dirigent actuellement la politique minoritaire en Roumanie sont bonnes, et quil y a, tant dun cot que de lautre, un bon esprit et le dsir rciproque de se comprendre. La lettre que M. le Deput Brandsch, Prsident de lOrganistion des Allemands de Roumanie, ma adresse le 31 octobre (dont la traduction franaise est annexe au prsent rapport) contient, mon avis, une expression trs intressante de lesprit de modration qui inspire aujourdhui lattitude de la minorit allemande vis--vis du gouvernement roumain. 5. Sans entrer ici dans les dtails des diffrentes questions concrtes qui ont fait lobjet de mes entretiens Bucarest,* je voudrais insrer ici certaines informations de fait dun caractre plutt gnral, et qui me semblent constituer des lments intressants pour arriver se faire une ide de la situation actuelle en Roumanie en ce qui concerne les minorits. ________________
* Ces questions font lobjet de notes spares qui figurent dans les dossiers respectifs.

a) Situation scolaire. M. Popp ma remis un memoire avec un certain nombre de tableaux, qui seront examins la Section.

b) La situation des minorits en ce qui concerne leur participation lAdministration publique semble avoir t trs amliore aprs lentre en vigueur de la nouvelle Loi sur lOrganisation administrative du pays. M. Tilea ma remis des tableaux qui montrent les effets de cette Loi sur le nombre de representants des differntes minorits participant aux fonctions administratives. (Annexe 1). Il serait peut-tre intressant ce sujet de rsumer ici lentretien que jai eu avec le Prfet du District dOdorhei. Ce district est un des trois districts sicules, et sa population (150.000 habitants) est forme de 95% de Hongrois et 5% de Roumains. Le Prfet ma expliqu que, daprs la nouvelle loi administrative, tous les pouvoirs ont t confrs aux organes reprsentatifs locaux, rservant au Prfet, en sa qualit de represntant du pouvoir central, un simple pouvoir de contrle, et le droit de veto dans les cas o les dispositions seraient prises en violation dune loi. La situation dans ce district, daprs les renseignements fournis par le Prfet, serait la suivante: le Conseil dpartemental serait form intgralement de membres appartenant la minorit, et serait prsid par le chef du Parti hongrois dans le dpartement. De ce fait, ma affirm le Prfet, on peut dire que ladministration de ce district se trouve entre les mains du Parti hongrois. Il y a dans le district 180 coles, dont 110 coles publiques et le reste coles confessionnelles toutes hongroises. Le Prfet ma expliqu que trs souvent il recevait des demandes de la part de la population hongroise pour que des coles confessionnelles soient transformes en coles publiques, mais quil refusait. Les difficults politiques proviennent, daprs lui, surtout du fait que les lments directifs de la population (aristocratie, grands propritaires et clerg) refusent toute collaboration avec les autorits roumaines, dans le seul but de rendre impossible une administration normale. Une partie considrable de la population hongroise serait partisane dune collaboration avec les autorits roumaines, mais la pression morale exerce par lautre lment est tellement forte quil est impossible dextrioriser des sentiments favorables la conciliation sans tre considr comme un tratre sa patrie, et comme un rengat. Le Prfet ma assur que, tout de mme, il entretient des relations personnelles cordiales avec tous les lments de la population du district. Il ma affirm, finalement, que parmi les 60 fonctionnaires de la Prfecture il ny avait que 4 de nationalit roumaine, et tous les quatre occupaient des postes tout--fait infrieurs. c) M. Paclasiano, Directeur du Bureau dtudes pour les Questions des Minorites la Prsidence du Conseil des Ministres, ma fourni certains renseignements qui me semblent intressants pour montrer le dveloppement de la minorit hongroise en Transylvanie dans ces dernires annes: Il ma affirm que, daprs le tmoignage dun crivain hongrois, on a publi en Transylvanie pendant les cinq dernires annes plus de livres et de revues hongrois que pendant cinquante annes avant la guerre. Actuellement le nombre de journaux hongrois paraissant en Transylvanie serait de 130. Six troupes de thtre hongroises et une seule troupe roumaine jouent rgulirement prsent dans les thtres des diffrentes villes en Transylvanie. Daprs des informations de source hongroise, les dpts dans les banques hongroises en Transylvanie se montaient actuellement la somme de 5 milliards de lei. d) Au cours de mes entretiens quelques personnes se sont rfres la situation de la minorit souabe dans le Banat. Cette population, sous le regime hongrois, aurait t soumise une magyarisation, tel point quelle aurait presque perdu le sentiment et la conscience de sa propre nationalit. Le Gouvernement roumain leur a donn des coles allemandes, et tche par tous les moyens de rveiller sa conscience nationale. La population serait tres satisfaite

davoir des coles allemandes, mais celles-ci rencontrent une opposition tres nergique de la part des autorits ecclsiastiques des glises catholiques et rformes hongroises. e) La situation dans la Dobroudja de sud a fait, notamment, lobjet dun entretien que jai eu avec M. Angelescu, Sous-Secretaire dEtat au Ministre de lIntrieur. M. Angelescu est une des personnalits politiques de cette rgion, et il a t toujours connu pour ses opinions favorables aux revendications de la population bulgare, opinions qui lui ont valu, il y a quelques mois, quelques blessures la suite dun attentat commis contre lui par des lments Koutzovalaques. M. Angelescu a spar nettement la question relative aux expropriations dont la population bulgare avait t lobjet la suite du systme de vrification des titres de proprit, et dont le but vritable tait de rendre possible linstallation de colons Koutzovalaques, et les luttes qui de temps en temps se produisent entre la population bulgare et la population Koutzovalaque, qui donnent lieu a des incidents et des actes que tout le monde regrette. M. Angelescu ma expliqu quen ce qui concerne la question des proprits, la loi qui etait promulge au mois de juin ou juillet dernier constitue une solution qui, son avis, doit etre considre comme satisfaisante. Si je me souviens bien, il ma dit quen vertu de cette loi une partie considrable des propritaires expropris pourraient rentrer en possession de leurs terres. Il ma remis un exemplaire de cette loi, et je me propose que cette question soit tudie en dtail par la Section. En ce qui concerne les incidents qui se produisent au sein de la population, il ne fallait pas, selon son opinion, y attribuer une trop grande importance, puisquil sagissait presque toujours dincidents locaux, qui navaient pas de porte gnrale quelconque. Parfois ils taient la consquence de provocations venues de lautre ct de la frontire, mais tres souvent il sagissait purement et simplement de conflits locaux. Si, en effet, la nouvelle loi contient un rglement satisfaisant de la question des proprits, il faut reconnatre que la solution de cette question aurait fait un grand pas. Il ny aurait pas alors de motifs pour que le gouvernement ne prenne pas toutes les mesures ncessaires pour assurer la minorit une protection efficace et complte contre les attaques possibles dont elle pourrait ventuellement tre lobjet. 6. Je pourrais peut-etre ajouter maintenant quelques impressions sur la situation gnrale de lors de mon sjour Bucarest. La proccupation principale du gouvernement et de lopinion publique tait la crise conomique, et, notamment, la crise agricole. Le manque dargent se fait sentir un tel point que pour les besoins de lagriculture il tait impossible den trouver un taux dintrt infrieur 30 a 35%. Pour me montrer la gravit de la crise agricole, M. Mironescu lui-mme ma donn les chiffres suivants: le wagon de bl valait il y a deux ans 135.000 lei; il vaut maintenant 15.000 lei. Il a ajout que le gouvernement se considrerait comme trs heureux sil pouvait stabiliser cette valeur a 30.000 lei. Des rductions budgetaires trs considrables taient envisages, et on tait en train de faire des tudes pour trouver des moyens pour librer la terre des dettes hypothcaires dont elle est charge parfois dans une proportion suprieure sa valeur. Jai cru remarquer quon attachait un grand intrt aux ngociations en cours entre les Etats agricoles. Dans lentretien que jai eu avec le Roi, il a insist beaucoup sur cette question, et sest declar trs satisfait de voir la Roumanie la tte de ce mouvement. Il ne cacha pas quil avait beaucoup plus de confiance dans ces essais pour arriver des ententes economiques rgionales que dans les efforts pour arriver des ententes politiques de caractre plus gnral. Le Roi dclara que, quel que ft le rsultat possible de ces conversations du

point de vue conomique, elles avaient dj produit un rsultat positif sous laspect politique, savoir que la Roumanie et la Hongrie setaient rencontres sur un terrain o elles avaient pu sentretenir amicalement. Le Roi souligna plusieurs reprises limportance de ce rsultat. Je pourrais ajouter quau cours dun djeuner auquel assistaient une vingtaine de personnalites politiques et de hauts fonctionnaires, M. Lugoianu, ancien Sous-Secretaire dEtat la Prsidence du Conseil dans le Cabinet de M. Maniu, dveloppa avec beaucoup de force la mme thse, c. a. d. quil fallait commencer par des arrangements rgionaux dun caractre conomique avant de procder la constitution dententes politiques gnrales, et cette thse obtint lassentiment gnral de toutes les personnes prsentes. Du ct politique il nest pas douteux que lintrt principal se porte du ct de la Russie. Cest sous langle de la politique russe et des relations avec la Russie quon considre en Roumanie le problme de la scurite. A ce sujet, jai t frapp de lintrt quon attache la question ukrainienne. Le dveloppement de cette question est suivi Bucarest avec la plus grande attention. Jai eu limpression que la cration dun Etat ukrainien indpendant est envisag, non seulement comme une ventualit possible, mais comme la solution du problme de la scurit pour la Roumanie du ct russe. Je nai pas pu, naturellement, approfondir ce problme, et je ne peux, par consquent, que donner ici, titre dindication, une simple impression personnelle, dont je nai pas besoin de souligner le caractre provisoire. P. Azcarate 18. X. 30
ASDN, 4/24674/939

4. PABLO AZCARATE CONFIDENIAL

CLTORIA N ROMNIA OCTOMBRIE 1930*

1. Scopul cltoriei, cel stabilit la Geneva cu delegaia romn, a fost n exclusivitate de a lua legtura personal cu organele nsrcinate n administraia romn cu examinarea chestiunilor privind minoritile, ca i cu persoanele responsabile de politica guvernului romn n acest domeniu. Chiar din momentul sosirii mele la Bucureti, am explicat n acest sens caracterul i semnificaia vizitei mele, explicaie care a fost imediat neleas i apreciat. n cursul ederii mele n Bucureti, am avut numeroase ntlniri cu persoane care, fie n administraie, fie n guvern, se ocup n mod special de problema minoritilor n Romnia (Lista acestor persoane formeaz o anex a acestui raport)**. Eu am avut, de asemenea, onoarea de a fi primit de Rege la Sinaia. Dei am avut contacte exclusiv cu persoane oficiale, pot afirma c scopul cltoriei mele a fost pe deplin atins, fiindc, pe de o parte, ea mi-a permis s stabilesc legturi personale care, cu siguran, vor face mai eficace activitatea Seciei Minoritilor i, pe de alt parte, am putut s-mi dau efectiv seama de anumite aspecte particulare de acum privind minoritile din Romnia i c ar fi nedrept i periculos s nu le acordm destul atenie.

________________
* Virgil L. Tilea, 4 Subsecretar de Stat la Preedinia Consiliului de Minitri cu care am discutat n particular acest subiect, m-a anunat c mi-a trimis discursurile rostite la acest Congres, ca i rezoluiile adoptate acolo.

________________
** Aceste probleme fac obiectul notelor separate care apar n dosarele respective.

2. Eu am avut impresia c problemele minoritilor au fost recent mutate de la Ministerul Afacerilor Externe la Preedinia Consiliului de Minitri, i cele care se refer la probleme colare, la Ministerul Instruciei Publice. Secia pentru Societatea Naiunilor de la Ministerul Afacerilor Strine a devenit, n privina problemelor minoritilor, un organism mai degrab de comunicare ntre guvern i Legaia romn de pe lng Societatea Naiunilor. Organismul care centralizeaz problemele minoritilor este Biroul de Studii pentru problemele minoritilor, creat de domnul Maniu n cadrul Preediniei Consiliului de Minitri. Ministerul Instruciei Publice se ocup, ntr-un mod deosebit, de problemele privind colile i cultele minoritare. A vrea s menionez c Subsecretarul de Stat actual n acest minister, domnul Pop1, cunoate foarte bine problema minoritilor din Romnia i consacr acestei chestiuni o atenie deosebit i o mare parte din timpul su. Aceast constatare, de altfel, se poate ntlni la ntreaga Administraie romn actual. La Preedinia Consiliului de Minitri, la Ministerul Instruciei Publice, la Ministerul de Interne peste tot am constatat c exist un interes pronunat pentru problema minoritilor i trebuie, de asemenea, s subliniez c, n general, oamenii care conduc acum politica referitoare la minoriti a guvernului romn mi-au prut a fi animai de un larg spirit de nelegere a problemei i de mult bunvoin pentru a o rezolva. 3. De la venirea la putere a dl. Maniu2 s-a pus problema elaborrii unui Statut general al minoritilor. Dl. Pop, actualul Subsecretar de Stat la Ministerul Instruciei Publice, a fost nsrcinat, anul trecut, de dl. Maniu s fac o cltorie de studii n mai multe ri care aveau angajamente n chestiunea minoritilor, pentru a obine documentaia necesar, putnd, apoi, redacta Statutul general al minoritilor, pe care avea intenia s-l supun spre dezbatere Parlamentului. Dl. Pop, dup ce a parcurs rile din Europa Central i rile baltice, a revenit n Romnia i, de mai multe ori, s-a ridicat problema, fie n pres, fie n declaraii oficiale ale guvernului, de a elabora un Statut general al minoritilor. Acest proiect a trezit un interes deosebit n mediile minoritare din Romnia i din alte ri i el a fost, adesea, subiect de comentarii n presa care se intereseaz n mod deosebit de aceste chestiuni. Din primele mele discuii avute la Bucureti, am avut impresia c ideea elaborrii unui Statut general al minoritilor, chiar dac n-a fost total abandonat, ea se gsete n suspensie. Dl. Pop nsui, fr ndoial cel mai nflcrat adept al acestei idei, a subliniat n timpul discuiilor noastre, dificultile enorme ivite n elaborarea acestui Statut, decurgnd, pe de o parte, din diversitatea situaiilor n care se gsesc diferitele minoriti i, pe de alt parte, din imposibilitatea de a ntreprinde o asemenea msur, fr a se pune de acord cu celelalte state semnatare de angajamente minoritare. Dl. Pop m-a fcut s neleg c guvernul, n aceste condiii, a trebuit s renune la ideea de a supune parlamentului, ntr-un viitor apropiat, statutul respectiv. Aceast impresie mi-a fost confirmat de dl. Mironescu nsui3. El mi-a spus c n timpul unei vizite la Cluj, efectuat cu cteva zile nainte, a fost ntrebat care este situaia acestui statut; a trebuit s rspund clar c studiile nu sunt destul de avansate pentru a

permite guvernului s prezinte parlamentului un proiect de Statut. Personal cred c greutile ntlnite n redactarea Statutului sunt reale i mi este clar, n consecin, c guvernul actual s-a vzut silit s pun lucrurile la punct, fcnd s se neleag c se afl n imposibilitatea de a supune pentru moment parlamentului un proiect oarecare. Pe de alt parte, mi-e team, i nu mi-am ascuns prerile la Bucureti, c aceast atitudine a guvernului va determina o decepie n rndul minoritilor, avnd drept consecin atacuri la adresa politicii guvernului n acest domeniu. 4. Am avut n mod cert impresia c una din principalele cauze ale dificultilor actuale n problema minoritilor din Romnia este c, pe drept sau pe nedrept, guvernul, autoritile i eu cred c i opinia public [romneasc] consider c, campaniile i activitile unora dintre minoriti, i n special a minoritii maghiare, urmresc nu s obin o mbuntire a situaiei lor ca minoritate, sau a minoritilor n cauz, ci mai curnd s menin o stare de agitaie, de nelinite i de nemulumire, pentru a induce n strintate impresia c statutul teritorial actual nu se poate menine i c trebuie, n consecin, s gndim la o revizuire a frontierelor. Aceast idee, c exist o legtur strns ntre atitudinea i propaganda anumitor minoriti i campania revizionist, se gsete astzi n prim-plan n toate minile celor care se ocup n Romnia de problema minoritilor. n timpul ederii mele n Bucureti, Partidul Maghiar a inut un congres la Satu Mare (Transilvania) i dup ceea ce mi s-a spus la Bucureti, contele Gheorghe Bethlen, preedintele Partidului ar fi spus n discursul su c Transilvania va face parte din nou din Ungaria ntr-un rstimp nu prea lung. Acest discurs a provocat o impresie penibil n mediile oficiale ale guvernului romn. Lumea se ntreba cum ar fi posibil s faci opinia public romn s accepte o politic de conciliere cu o minoritate, al crei lider ine public un asemenea discurs.* De fiecare dat cnd mi s-a vorbit despre acest lucru, i cred c nu este nici mcar o persoan care s nu fi fcut referire la el, eu mi-am exprimat prerea c va trebui s se evite faptul c protecia minoritilor de ctre Societatea Naiunilor s fie folosit ca un instrument de agitaie politic n alt scop dect acela al respectrii i executrii integrale a prevederilor din Tratatele minoritilor. Am spus c atitudinea guvernelor de a pretinde minoritilor o loialitate total fa de Stat va dobndi n mod clar sprijinul diferitelor organe ale Societii Naiunilor chemate s intervin n materie de protecie a minoritilor. Am adugat c pentru ca o astfel de atitudine s poat gsi sprijin, trebuie ca guvernele s arate, clar, c i-au ndeplinit n ntregime obligaiile conform tratatelor i c nemulumirile formulate de minoriti la acest subiect sunt nefondate. Situaia ar fi cu totul diferit dac un guvern, invocnd atitudinea neloial a minoritilor, s-ar crede dispensat de a aplica n privina lor chiar i prevederile stricte din tratatele minoritilor. Am insistat ndeajuns, mai ales pe lng dl. Tilea pentru ca n observaiile [guvernului romn], care vor fi prezentate pe viitor [Societii Naiunilor] cu privire la diferitele petiii, guvernul s explice ct se poate de limpede care este situaia n privina atitudinii politice generale a minoritii n cauz. La modul general am subliniat ntotdeauna c petiiile ofer guvernelor posibilitile de a se explica i aceasta fr a fi obligate s ia iniiativa, ceea ce adesea ar putea prea suspect. Dl. Tilea mi-a mulumit pentru indicaii i m-a anunat c nu va ezita s ia msurile necesare pentru ca s se in cont de ele n pregtirea Observaiilor pe care guvernul romn va putea fi chemat s le formuleze pe viitor. I-am atras, de asemenea, atenia d-lui Tilea asupra interesului pe care l poate avea pentru guverne dispoziia din rezoluia de la Madrid privind publicarea rezultatelor.

Am menionat minoritatea maghiar ca fiind cea pentru care dificultile izvorte din legtura dintre cele dou idei, una, protecia minoritilor, i o a doua, revizuirea frontierelor, sunt cele mai acute. Dimpotriv, atitudinea minoritii germane mi s-a prut a fi considerat din acest punct de vedere, a fi satisfctoare. Am avut impresia c relaiile dintre efii acestei minoriti i oamenii care conduc n prezent politica minoritar n Romnia sunt bune i c exist i dintr-o parte i din cealalt o bun nelegere i dorina reciproc de a se nelege. Scrisoarea domnului deputat Brandsch5, preedintele Organizaiei germanilor din Romnia, pe care mi-a trimis-o la 31 octombrie (a crei traducere n limba francez este anexat acestui raport) conine, dup prerea mea, o expresie foarte interesant a spiritului de moderaie care anim astzi atitudinea minoritii germane fa de guvernul romn. 5. Fr s intru n detaliile diferitelor chestiuni concrete, care au fcut obiectul discuiilor mele la Bucureti**, a dori s includ n raport unele informaii cu un caracter mai degrab general, i care mi se par a constitui elemente interesante pentru a se ajunge la formarea unei idei despre situaia actual din Romnia privitoare la minoriti. a). Situaia colar. Dl. Pop mi-a nmnat un memoriu cu cteva tabele care vor fi examinate la Secie. b). Situaia minoritilor cu privire la participarea lor la administraia public pare c s-a mbuntit foarte mult dup intrarea n vigoare a noii Legi a administraiei publice a rii6. Dl. Tilea mi-a dat tabele, care arat efectele acestei legi, cu privire la numrul reprezentanilor diferitelor minoriti avnd funcii publice (Anexa 1). Poate ar fi interesant n aceast privin ca s rezumm aici ntrevederea pe care am avut-o cu prefectul judeului Odorhei. Acest jude este unul din cele trei judee secuieti iar populaia sa (150. 000 locuitori) este format n proporie de 95% din unguri i 5% romni. Prefectul mi-a explicat c dup noua lege administrativ toate puterile [publice] au fost ncredinate organelor reprezentative locale, rezervndu-i-se prefectului, n calitatea lui de reprezentant al guvernului, un simplu drept de control i dreptul de veto n cazurile n care dispoziiile luate ar nclca o lege. Situaia n acest jude, dup informaiile furnizate de prefect, ar fi urmtoarea: Consiliul judeean ar fi compus n totalitate din membri aparinnd minoritii [maghiar] i ar fi prezidat de ctre eful Partidului Maghiar din jude. Ca atare, mi-a declarat prefectul, se poate spune c administraia acestui jude se gsete n minile Partidului Maghiar. n jude sunt 180 de coli, dintre care 110 coli publice, iar restul, coli confesionale toate ungureti. Prefectul mi-a explicat c foarte adesea primete cereri din partea populaiei maghiare pentru ca colile confesionale s fie transformate n coli publice, dar c el a refuzat acest lucru. Neajunsurile de ordin politic provin, n opinia lui, mai ales din faptul c liderii politici ai populaiei [maghiare] (aristocrai, mari proprietari i cler) refuz orice colaborare cu autoritile romne, cu singurul scop de a face imposibil o administraie normal. O parte considerabil a populaiei maghiare ar fi adepta unei colaborri cu autoritile romneti, dar presiunea moral exercitat de ctre ali factori este att de puternic, nct este imposibil de manifestat sentimente favorabile nelegerii, fr a fi considerat renegat i trdtor fa de patria sa. Prefectul m-a asigurat c, cu toate acestea, el ntreine relaii cordiale cu toate categoriile populaiei din jude. n final, mi-a spus c dintre cei 60 de funcionari de la Prefectur nu sunt dect 4 de naionalitate romn i c toi patru ocup posturi inferioare. c). Dl. Pclianu7, directorul Biroului de Studii pentru problemele minoritilor din cadrul Preediniei Consiliului de Minitri, mi-a oferit cteva informaii care mi se par interesante, pentru a arta dezvoltarea minoritii maghiare din Transilvania n ultimii ani. El mi-a spus c, potrivit mrturiei unui scriitor maghiar, n Transilvania s-au publicat n ultimii

cinci ani mai multe cri i reviste maghiare dect n cei 50 de ani premergtori rzboiului. n prezent, numrul ziarelor maghiare din Transilvania ar fi de 130. ase trupe de teatru maghiare i o singur trup romneasc in acum, n mod regulat, spectacole n teatrele din diferitele orae ale Transilvaniei. Dup informaii de surs maghiar depunerile n bncile maghiare din Transilvania ating acum suma de 5 miliarde lei. d) n timpul ntrevederilor, cteva persoane s-au referit la situaia minoritii vabe din Banat8. Aceast populaie, sub regimul maghiar, ar fi fost supus unui proces de maghiarizare n aa msur nct aproape c i pierduse sentimentul i contiina propriei sale naionaliti. Guvernul romn le-a deschis coli n limba german i ncearc, prin toate mijloacele, s le trezeasc contiina naional. Populaia ar fi foarte mulumit s aib coli germane, dar demersul guvernului ntmpin o opoziie foarte energic din partea autoritilor eclesiastice ale bisericilor catolice i reformate maghiare. e) Situaia din Dobrogea de Sud9 a fcut, n special, obiectul unei discuii pe care am avut-o cu dl. Angelescu10, subsecretar de Stat la Ministerul de Interne. Dl. Angelescu este una dintre personalitile politice din aceast regiune. Era recunoscut pentru prerile favorabile revendicrilor populaiei bulgare, opinii care i-au provocat, acum cteva luni, rni, ca urmare a unui atentat comis mpotriva lui din partea unor elemente kuovalache. Dl. Angelescu a fcut o distincie clar ntre problema referitoare la exproprierile la care populaia bulgar fusese supus ca urmare a sistemului de verificare a titlurilor de proprietate, i al crui scop real era de a face posibil instalarea colonitilor kuovalachi i luptele care au loc din cnd n cnd ntre populaia bulgar i kuovalachi, care provoac incidente i acte pe care toat lumea le regret. Dl. Angelescu mi-a explicat c, n ceea ce privete problema proprietilor, legea promulgat n luna iunie sau iulie ale anului acesta, constituie o soluie care dup prerea lui trebuie considerat satisfctoare. Dac mi aduc bine aminte, el mi-a spus c, n virtutea acestei legi, o parte nsemnat a proprietilor expropriate vor putea reintra n posesia pmnturilor lor. El mi-a dat un exemplar al acestei legi i eu mi propun ca aceast problem s fie studiat n amnunime de ctre Secie. n privina incidentelor care se produc n snul populaiei, n-ar trebui, dup prerea mea, s li se acorde prea mare importan, pentru c aproape ntotdeauna sunt incidente locale, care nu au o nsemntate general deosebit. Uneori ele erau consecina provocrilor venite din cealalt parte a frontierei, dar foarte adesea este vorba, pur i simplu, de conflicte locale. Dac ntr-adevr noua Lege conine o reglementare satisfctoare a problemei proprietilor, trebuie s recunoatem c i rezolvarea acestei probleme a avansat. Atunci n-ar mai fi motive pentru ca guvernul s nu ia toate msurile necesare pentru a-i asigura minoritii [bulgare] o protecie eficace i complet mpotriva posibilelor atacuri la care ar putea fi supus. 6. A putea, probabil, s adaug acum cteva impresii asupra situaiei generale din Romnia n perioada n care am fost acolo. Preocuparea principal a guvernului i a opiniei publice este criza economic i, n special, criza agricol. Lipsa banilor se resimte ntr-o aa msur nct pentru nevoile agriculturii este imposibil s se gseasc un tarif de interes mai mic celui de la 30 la 35%. Pentru a-mi arta gravitatea crizei agricole, Dl. Minonescu nsui mi-a oferit cifrele urmtoare: un vagon de gru valora acum doi ani 135. 000 lei; el valoreaz acum 15. 000 lei. El a adugat c guvernul ar fi foarte bucuros dac ar putea stabiliza aceast valoare la 30. 000 lei. Sunt previzibile reduceri bugetare deosebite i sunt n derulare studii pentru a gsi

mijloacele de a elibera pmnturile de datoriile ipotecare cu care sunt ncrcate uneori ntr-o proporie mai mare dect valoarea lor. Am crezut c observ c se acord un mare interes negocierilor n curs ntre statele agricole11. n ntrevederea pe care am avut-o cu regele, el a insistat mult asupra acestei probleme i s-a declarat foarte mulumit s vad Romnia n fruntea acestei micri. El nu ascunde faptul c avea mai mult ncredere n aceste ncercri de a ajunge la nelegeri economice regionale, dect n eforturile de a se ncheia nelegeri politice cu un caracter mai general. Regele afirm c indiferent de rezultatul discuiilor pe teme economice, ele au determinat deja un rezultat pozitiv n plan politic, se tie, c Romnia i Ungaria s-au ntlnit pe un teren, unde au putut discuta prietenete12. Regele subliniaz de mai multe ori importana acestui rezultat. A putea aduga c n timpul dejunului, la care asistau vreo douzeci de persoane politice i funcionari nali, dl. Lugoanu13, fost subsecretar de stat la Preedinia Consiliului de Minitri n guvernul Maniu, a insistat asupra aceleiai idei, i anume c ar trebui s se nceap cu aranjamente regionale economice, nainte de a se proceda la constituirea de nelegeri politice generale. Aceast opinie e mprtit de toi cei prezeni la dejun. Sub raport politic, fr ndoial, principalul interes i se acord Rusiei14. n Romnia se consider c securitatea rii este n legtur cu politica Rusiei i a relaiilor cu aceasta. La acest subiect am fost surprins de interesul acordat problemei ucrainiene. Dezvoltarea acesteia este urmrit la Bucureti cu cea mai mare atenie. Am avut impresia c formarea unui stat ucrainian independent este privit nu doar ca o eventualitate posibil, dar i ca o soluie a problemei securitii Romniei n faa Rusiei. Firete, nu am putut aprofunda aceast problem i, prin urmare, nu pot dect s dau aici, cu titlu de indicaie, o simpl impresie personal, al crei caracter provizoriu nu mai este nevoie s-l subliniez. P. Azcarate 18. II. 1930
NOTE *O parte a documentului a fost analizat de Corneliu R. Zach, Der Vlkerbund. **Persoanele cu care s-a ntlnit Azcarate: G. Mironescu, Costchescu, V. V. Tilea, Gheorghe Pop, C. Angelescu, Z. Pclianu, Mihail Arion, Filoti, Alexandru Creianu. 1. Gheorghe Pop. 2. Primul guvern Iuliu Maniu (10 noiembrie 1928 6 iunie 1930). S. Neagoe, p. 95-97. 3. George G. Mironescu era prim-ministru (10 octombrie 1930 17 aprilie 1931). Ibidem, p. 99-100. 4. Virgil V. Tilea. 5. Rudolf Brandsch, preedintele Uniunii Germanilor din Romnia. n guvernul Nicolae Iorga (18 aprilie 1931 5 iunie 1932), subsecretar de stat la Preedinia Consiliului de Minitri pentru Minoriti i n cele dou guverne Alexandru Vaida-Voevod (6 iunie 10 august 1933 i 11 august 19 octombrie 1932). S. Neagoe, p. 101, 104, 106. 6. Legea din anul 1929 a cunoscut cel mai nalt grad al descentralizrii administrative din perioada interbelic. Din cauza costurilor ridicate de aplicare n-a rmas n vigoare dect pn la guvernul N. Iorga. 1930 O alt anex cu funcionarii minoritari n Transilvania:

Consilieri oreneti: Maghiari Germani Evrei Consilieri: Maghiari Germani Evrei Iugoslavi

nainte de 1930 200 115 64 130 45 15 2

Dup Legea administrativ din 1929 341 122 99 178 75 19 3

Cifrele din judeele secuieti sunt i mai elocvente:

Judeul Ciuc Romni Maghiari Evrei Romni Maghiari Germani Romni Maghiari Evrei 2 21 1 2 20 1 4 10 1 5 24 1 28 1 20 1

Judeul Odorhei

Judeul Trei Scaune

Azcarate constat c s-a nregistrat, de asemenea, o cretere a funcionarilor oreneti i judeeni minoritari i n Bucovina.
BUCOVINA Consilieri oreneti Germani Evrei Ucraineni Polonezi Consilieri judeeni Maghiari Germani Evrei Ucraineni Polonezi BASARABIA Consilieri oreneti Germani Evrei Bulgari Rui Ucraineni Polonezi 1 16 21 35 21 1 22 26 13 21 2 32 58 27 4 1 5 6 20 1 42 92 47 14 1 9 13 31 3

7. Zenovie Pclianu. 8. K. Kgel. 9. Se mai numea Dobrogea Nou. A intrat n componena statului romn n anul 1913. Prima reglementare a proprietii s-a fcut n aceast regiune de ctre statul romn prin legea din 13 martie 1914. Ea a fost nlocuit prin legea de organizare a Dobrogei Noi din iulie 1921. O alt lege modificatoare s-a emis n anul 1924. Potrivit acesteia, deintorii de bunuri mirie o form care venea din Imperiul Otoman, n care statul era proprietarul pmntului i l ddea n folosin deintorii de pmnt rmneau proprietari peste 2/3 din suprafa, 1/3 era a statului. Din aceast treime s-a constituit o proprietate mai ntins a statului, unde, ncepnd cu anul 1925, au fost adui de statul romn coloniti macedoneni sau aromni. Termenul de Kutzovalach este specific limbii greceti. Vezi, N. Cua, p. 27-52. 10. Constantin Angelescu. 11. Vezi Conferina agricol romno-iugoslav de la Sinaia, de la nceputul lunii august 1930. Patria (Cluj) nr. 160 din 2 august 1930, p. 5; nr. 162 din 4 august 1930. Alte ntruniri ntre mai multe state europene pe teme agricole s-au inut la Bucureti i Varovia. Virgil Madgearu, ministrul Industriei i Comerului a vorbit n Comisia a II-a a Societii Naiunilor, n numele celor 8 state de la Varovia, ntre care i Ungaria, despre soluiile la criza agricol. Patria nr. 203 din 25 septembrie 1930; V. Madgearu, p. X. 12. Primul-ministru al Ungariei, contele Istvn Bethlen, a discutat la Geneva cu reprezentani ai Micii nelegeri, din partea Romniei cu V. Madgearu, chestiuni agricole. Patria nr. 193 din 13 septembrie 1930. 13. Ion Lugoianu.

14. Analiza politic a fost corect. Uniunea Sovietic n-a recunoscut niciodat unirea Basarabiei cu Romnia. Cnd condiiile internaionale i-au fost favorabile, n anul 1940, a reocupat teritoriul romnesc dintre Prut i Nistru.

5. PABLO AZCARATE

NOTE SUR MON VOYAGE EN ROUMANIE

(SEPTEMBRE 1932) CONFIDENTIEL SECRETAIRE GENERAL [de la Socit des Nations] Je me permets de vous faire tenir ci-joint une note rsumant quelques observations que jai pu faire et les informations que jai pu obtenir au cours de mon rcent voyage en Roumanie, relativement la question des biens de lancien rgiment sicule. Si vous ne voyez pas dinconvnient, je pense quil serait indiqu de communiquer cette note aux membres du Comit. Le Comit se runira mardi prochain et M. Sawada voudrait, au cours de cette semaine, tablir avec moi un projet de rapport qui pourrait servir de base de discussion pour le Comit. Ds quil sera prt je vous soumettrai le projet de rapport, avant de le communiquer M. Sawada. 1). Ds mon arrive Bucarest le 1er septembre, jai visit dun ct le sous-secrtaire dEtat au Ministre des Affaires Etrangres et dun autre ct le Ministre de lInstruction Publique et le Ministre de lAgriculture-comme les chefs des dpartements les plus directement intresss dans la question relative aux biens de Ciuc. Les entretiens avec le sous secretaire dEtat aux Affaires Etrangres et avec le ministre et sous secrtaire dEtat de lInstruction Publique ont eu un caractre plutt gnral. Par contre, le Ministre de lAgriculture, sans entrer dans les dtails de la question quil semblait cependant connatre dune manire assez approfondie, a dvelopp avec beaucoup de force la thse juridique qui a t ds le commencement celle du Gouvernement roumain et daprs laquelle, dans le cas de lancien rgiment sicule, les biens appartenaient en proprit lEtat et les descendants des membres du rgiment ne jouissaient que de lusufruit, tandis que dans les cas des deux rgiments roumains de Nassaud et de Caransebes, les descendants des membres taient les vritables propritaires des biens. Le ministre a expliqu comme raison de cette diffrence que la proprit des descendants des membres des deux rgiments roumains avait t consacre par une loi spciale hongroise, ce qui navait pas t le cas en ce qui concerne le rgiment sicule. Etant donn que cet aspect strictement juridique de la question ne fait actuellement lobjet dexamen ni par le Comit, ni par le Conseil, je nai pas cru devoir montrer un intrt particulier son sujet et jai prfr ne pas insister pour avoir des explications plus dtailles de la part du ministre de lAgriculture. Pour le reste, ce dernier, qui tait dj au courant de mon intention de faire une visite au district de Ciuc, ma dclar quil prendrait les dispositions ncessaires dont je pourrais avoir besoin.

2). Le mme jour a eu lieu au Ministre des Affaires Etrangres (Section de la Socit des Nations) une runion de hauts fonctionnaires des Ministres de lAgriculture et de lInstruction Publique, qui ont t appels traiter cette question. En dehors de M. Brediceanu, secrtaire de Lgation la Section de la Socit des Nations du Ministre des Affaires Etrangres, les fonctionnaires suivants ont pris part cette runion:de la part du Ministre de lInstruction Publique M. Caliani, directeur gnral de lenseignement minoritaire, de la part du Ministre de lAgriculture un inspecteur forestier (dont malheureusement je nai pas pu retenir le nom) et M. Avramesco, conseiller juridique de la circonscription dArad et qui avait pris part, avec M. Brediceanu, aux ngociations avec le Comit Genve au mois de juin dernier. Au cours de cette runion les points suivants ont t examins: a) Mesures envisages pour oprer la restitution prvue dans les dernires propositions soumises au Comit par le Gouvernement roumain du 50% des forts et des pturages en possession de lEtat. A la demande du Ministre des Affaires Etrangres, le Ministre de lAgriculture avait prpar deux alternatives, contenant chacune deux lots entre lesquels le Comit pourrait choisir. Lune de ces alternatives contenait deux lots dune valeur et dune tendue approximativement gales. Lautre, qui sera probablement celle que le Ministre des Affaires Etrangres soumettra au Comit, contiendra deux lots dune valeur et dune tendue diffrentes, dans ce sens que le plus grand (partie au nord, avec deux parcelles isoles, situes au sud) sera dune valeur infrieure au lot le plus petit (partie centrale). La raison en serait que ce dernier lot se trouvait dans des conditions dexploitation plus favorables que le premier, notamment en raison du fait quil se trouve travers par des voies de communication importantes. Comme je viens de le dire, le Gouvernement soumettra probablement au Comit cette dernire alternative, avec tous les renseignements dordre technique et les cartes ncessaires pour quil puisse faire le choix. Lopinion de linspecteur forestier, qui avait prpar cette tendue et qui tait prsent la runion opinion partage par tous les autres fonctionnaires prsents tait que lintrt de linstitution des Biens Privs serait dobtenir le lot le plus petit et dune plus grande valeur. Quant lEtat, ils taient davis quil aurait plutt intrt garder le lot le plus grand et dune valeur infrieure. Le revenu net du lot le plus petit et le plus facilement exploitable tait calcul par linspecteur forestier environ 1. 200. 000 lei par an, c. a. d. 40. 00 francs suisses. b). Choix des communes qui ont bnfici de la distribution des forts et des pturages. Avant de passer un autre sujet jai voulu soulever un point qui ma sembl prsenter un intrt particulier, notamment en ce qui concerne la participation de la population hongroise dans la distribution des forts et des pturages qui ont t attribus certaines communes sous la forme de biens communaux, point dont lintrt avait t soulign lors de la conversation tenue Paris entre M. Sawada et Sir William Malkin le 19 aot dernier. Jai trouv que le moyen le plus pratique de soulever cette question tait de me rfrer lallgation concrte contenue dans le chapitre III du mmoire de M. Gabor du 27 juillet 1930 (doc. C. 174. 1931. I. page 65). Daprs cette allgation la partie des biens qui a t distribue aurait t attribue des communes dont une partie de la population et parfois une partie considrable tait roumaine, tandis que des communes purement sicules et beaucoup plus rapproches des biens partags

(les noms dun certain nombre de ces communes sont mentionns) naurait pas reu une part quelconque dans le partage de ces biens. Jai dit quil serait certainement trs intressant pour le Comit de possder des renseignements prcis et dtaills lui permettant de comprendre les critres daprs lesquels on a fait le choix des dix communes bnficiaires dans la distribution de ces biens lexclusion de celles mentionnes par le Dr. Gabor, situes plus prs des biens distribues et de la population hongroise. Linspecteur forestier, ainsi que M. Avramesco, men ont donn tout de suite une explication, selon laquelle toutes les communes hongroises mentionnes par le Dr. Gabor possdaient, soit sous la forme de biens communaux, soit sous la forme compossessorats, dnormes tendues de forts et de pturages, souvent trs au-dessus de la limite fixe par la loi, tandis que les communes auxquelles les biens de Ciuc avaient t attribus se trouvaient, ou entirement dpourvues de forts et de pturages, ou en possession dtendues insuffisantes. Ils ont mme ajout quil y avait aussi des communes qui, non seulement nont rien reu dans la distribution des biens de Ciuc, mais qui ont t obliges de cder en faveur dautres communes moins riches une partie de leurs forts et de leurs pturages communaux. En remerciant les fonctionnaires de cette explication, jai insist sur lintrt que le Comit ne manquerait pas dattacher des renseignements qui lui permettraient de connatre la situation de chacune des communes bnficiaires et de chacune des communes exclues mentionnes par M. Gabor, en ce qui concerne ltendue des forts et des pturages dont elles taient propritaires au moment o la distribution des biens de Ciuc a eu lieu. Linspecteur forestier a dclar quil allait tout de suite prendre les mesures ncessaires pour prparer ces informations et M. Brediceanu ma annonc quelles seraient communiques au Comit aussitt que possible. Je pense toujours que la force morale du rapport qui sera prsent au Conseil se trouverait considrablement augmente sil pouvait contenir des renseignements dtaills concernant les diffrentes communes cites par les ptitionnaires et de nature rectifier la thse formule par ces derniers. Sous rserve des informations ultrieures, je pourrais ajouter lexplication suivante, qui ma t fournie en ce qui concerne le cas de la commune de Voslobeni, qui se trouve situe une distance de 60 km. des forts et des pturages qui lui ont t distribus. En vertu dune premire dcision, cette commune avait reu une parcelle situe sa proximit, mais cette dcision ayant t casse par vice de forme par le Comit agraire, il a fallu lui attribuer des forts et des pturages o on a pu les trouver; il a t impossible de trouver des forts et des pturages pour elle situs une distance infrieure. Dautre part, plusieurs cas mont t cits de communes hongroises qui exploitaient depuis longtemps des forts une distance encore suprieure celle entre Voslobeni et les forts qui lui ont t attribues. c). Lyce de Miercurea Ciuc Actuellement ce lyce est exclusivement roumain. Depuis 1931, pour des raisons conomiques, cest un lyce mixte, pour garons et filles. Le total dlves actuellement, aprs la fusion, est de 105, dont 46% Roumains et 54% Hongrois. Le nombre dlves a sensiblement diminu dans ces dernires annes cause sans doute du manque denseignement en hongrois et de la suppression de linternat. A ce sujet M. Caliani ma fait noter que dans la mme ville de Miercurea Ciuc il y a un gymnase catholique romain avec droit de publicit et Gheorghieni une cole secondaire de

jeunes filles, entretenues par des religieuses catholiques les deux institutions avec internat. Voici maintenant quelques chiffres en ce qui concerne lentretien de ce lyce. En 1923 les Biens Privs auraient pay pour le personnel enseignant une somme de 117.000 lei. Entre 1923 et 1932 lEtat a pay des sommes allant de 304.000 lei en 1924 a 2.100.000 lei en 1928 et 508. 188 en 1932. Finalement, M. Caliani, directeur de lenseignement minoritaire au Ministre de lInstruction publique, a dclar quen vue des circonstances spciales, le Gouvernement roumain serait prt crer des classes parallles hongroises dans ce lyce, mme si le minimum de 30 lves exig par la loi pour la cration de ces classes ntait pas atteint. d). Orphelinat de Sumuleu Lorphelinat contient actuellement 21 orphelins roumains et 52 hongrois: total 72. Depuis 1923 lEtat a pay annuellement pour lentretien de lorphelinat 500.000 lei. En 1932 il a pay 400.000 lei. Une dcision aurait t dj prise pour quil y ait dans lorphelinat deux instituteurs un Roumain et un Hongrois. Etant donn que je devais visiter ces institutions lors de mon voyage dans le district de Ciuc, il ma sembl inutile dinsister pour obtenir ce moment des informations plus dtailles. 3). La journe de dimanche, le 4 septembre, a t consacre une visite la ville de Miercurea Ciuc. Dans le voyage que nous avons fait en automobile et qui nous a pris la journe de samedi, jai t accompagn par M. Brediceanu du Ministre des Affaires trangres et M. Avramesco. Ds que nous sommes entrs dans le district de Ciuc jai t fortement impressionn par le caractre nettement hongrois de la population (langue, aspect extrieur des villages et des maisons, costumes, etc.) et par la grande libert et confiance avec lesquelles ce caractre hongrois sest extrioris. En gnral, lorsque nous avions besoin dun renseignement quelconque, il fallait le demander en hongrois, ce que M. Avramesco, Roumain de Transylvanie et connaissant le hongrois comme sa propre langue, faisait avec la meilleure grce. En gnral les paysans, qui restaient un peu interdits si on sadressait eux en roumain, devenaient aimables et pleins de bienveillance ds que M. Avramesco leur parlait en hongrois et ceci sans le moindre signe de gne ou de mfiance. Quoique je me rende compte du caractre extrmement superficiel et fragile de ces impressions, je dois cependant dire que, dans la mesure o un contact comme celui-ci permet de se faire une ide de ltat rel des choses, je nai pas eu limpression de me trouver au milieu dune population subissant la pression dune politique de dnationalisation de la part du Gouvernement roumain, telle quelle est souvent dcrite dans les ptitions ou dans la presse. Il est regretter que cette impression plutt favorable en ce qui concerne les manifestations de la vie prive de la population soit gte par le soin avec lequel lAdministration a cart la langue hongroise dans les inscriptions officielles. Dans la ville de Miercurea Ciuc jai t en relation avec le sous-prfet du Dpartement (le prfet tait absent) et le conseiller agricole. Il a t dcid que la meilleure manire dutiliser notre temps serait de visiter les difices et les institutions rclams par les ptitionnaires et qui se trouvent dans la ville mme. En outre, jai cru devoir profiter de ma visite pour pouvoir examiner personnellement la forme sous laquelle figure inscrite dans le livre foncier la proprit des Biens Privs.

Jai voulu, avant dentrer dans la question mme des biens de Ciuc, obtenir quelques renseignements dun caractre plus gnral sur la situation de la population hongroise par rapport lAdministration publique. Voici les donnes qui mont t fournies la Prfecture. Prfecture de Miercurea Ciuc: 41 fonctionnaires hongrois 9 fonctionnaires roumains Tribunaux: 4 juges roumains 7 juges hongrois (Les juges roumains parlent le hongrois. Le personnel infrieur est hongrois). Services techniques de la Prfecture: 50 fonctionnaires hongrois 6 fonctionnaires roumains (Lingnieur-en-chef est hongrois) Administration financire: 40 50 fonctionnaires, dont 3 Roumains Service forestier: 1 Chef roumain 1 Chef hongrois Tous les fonctionnaires hongrois. Police: Dans la ville de Miercurea Ciuc 10 agents hongrois et 10 roumains. La gendarmerie est recrute dans la population du pays. Parmi les 56 communes du district il y a 31 qui ont des Conseils Communaux lus et 25 des Commissions intrimaires nommes par le Gouvernement. Ces dernires sont entirement composes de Hongrois. La Commission intrimaire de la ville de Miercurea Ciuc, nomme par le Gouvernement, est forme de 4 Hongrois et 3 Roumains. Le Conseil dpartemental nomm galement par le Gouvernement est form de 7 Hongrois et 2 Roumains. a). Nous avons commenc par une rapide visite la caserne, qui se trouve actuellement occupe par des troupes dinfanterie et sur laquelle je nai pas dobservation spciale faire. Cest un grand difice, solidement bti, qui pourrait difficilement tre affect une utilisation diffrente de celle laquelle il est affect actuellement. b). On ma montr ensuite le terrain o se trouvait lancienne cole dagriculture et sur lequel on est en train de construire une glise orthodoxe. Lexplication dj fournie par le Gouvernement ma t rpte, savoir que le btiment de lcole dagriculture tait compltement en ruines et quil a fallu le dmolir. La construction de lglise est actuellement en suspens, cause du manque de fonds. c). Le thtre La Rdoute contient actuellement en partie les bureaux du District forestier et la salle dun cinma. Ldifice est trs bien et se trouve situ au milieu de la ville, juste en face de la villa dans laquelle habite le Dr. Gabor. Comme partout, les placards et les affiches du cinma taient rdiges en roumain et en hongrois. d). Le lyce est install dune manire plutt modeste dans un grand et solide difice, dont les dimensions sont tout fait disproportionnes au nombre relativement rduit dlves. Le

lyce est exclusivement roumain et par consquent tout le matriel denseignement inscriptions, criteaux, etc, est rdig exclusivement en roumain. Du point de vue de lespace, il ny aurait certainement pas la moindre difficult pour linstallation de classes parallles hongroises. e). Nous avons ensuite visit le gymnase catholique romain, dont la somptuosit contraste du lyce (voir photographie). Nous avons t reus par le directeur qui nous a montr les classes, linternat, les laboratoires, le muse, etc. Il sagit dune institution confessionnelle, entretenue par lEglise catholique romaine de Transylvanie et ayant le droit de publicit. Lenseignement est donn en hongrois, sauf la gographie, lhistoire et lducation civique, le roumain figure comme matire denseignement. Le matriel denseignement inscriptions, criteaux, etc. sont exclusivement en hongrois. En visitant la chapelle, un fonctionnaire qui maccompagnait ma fait discrtement observer que la couronne de St. Etienne restait le motif de dcoration le plus important. Pendant la visite jai eu limpression que le directeur du Gymnase et M. Caliani, qui se sont entretenus souvent en hongrois (le directeur parle aussi le roumain), se trouvaient dans les meilleurs termes. Lors de notre visite se tenait au local mme du Gymnase un congrs dintellectuels de Transylvanie. M. Caliani ma fait remarquer que cette runion avait t convoque sans mme en avoir averti le Ministre. f). Dans le bureau du registre foncier, jai pu examiner personnelle-ment le dossier original hongrois des Biens Privs. La premire partie de ce dossier contient une liste de biens appartenant cette institution lorsque le livre foncier a t tabli (1870). Une deuxime partie contient les indications et les rfrences des diffrentes acquisitions aux ventes faites par les titulaires du dossier. Le point essentiel tait mon avis de vrifier la forme daprs laquelle le titulaire de droit de la proprit de ces biens tait dsign. Cette formule en hongrois est la suivante: Csik Kznsge. La premire feuille du dossier est dchire et le mot Kznsge manque. Mais dans toutes les inscriptions concernant les ventes et les achats postrieurs 1870 figure la formule complte. Jai suggr lenvoi au Comit dune copie de loriginal hongrois de ce dossier, ou au moins len-tte. Une deuxime chose intressante ma t montre au livre foncier, savoir le texte original hongrois dun contrat dachat fait par les Biens Privs et dans lequel il est expressment dit reprsentants du prfet dsigns par celui-ci en vertu dune rsolution adopte par lAssemble. On ma annonc galement quune copie de loriginal de ce contrat serait communique au Comit. g). Lors dune rapide visite au bureau du Conseiller agricole, jai soulev de nouveau la question relative aux motifs pour lesquels on a choisi certaines communes pour la distribution des biens de Ciuc, en excluant dautres plus rapproches. Le conseiller agricole, en rptant la mme explication qui mavait t donne Bucarest, ma dit quil prparerait la matire ncessaire pour pouvoir fournir les renseignements qui mintressaient. A titre dexemple, il a mentionn la commune de Gheorghieni, cite par M. Gabor et qui possde, soit sous forme de biens communaux soit sous forme de compossessorats une tendue de 13.000 ha. de fort. h). Au cours du djeuner, pris dans un restaurant hongrois o tout le monde parlait hongrois sans la moindre gne, jai essay de connatre par le conseiller agricole du district les vritables sentiments de la population paysanne hongroise en ce qui concerne la division des Biens. A mes questions il a rpondu sans la moindre hsitation que la population hongroise

rurale tait contente et satisfaite de la distribution, grce laquelle elle pouvait bnficier des forts et pturages comme des biens communaux, au lieu dtre force de payer, comme au pass, un affermage lAdministration des biens. Lide dominante en tait que toute laffaire navait comme base que le dsir de M. Pal Gabor daffermir et conserver son influence politique dans le pays. Le conseiller agricole se rfra, au cours de la conversation, au Dr. Gaal, ancien Directeur des Biens1, lequel dans des conversations prives ne cacherait pas son opinion favorable la prise de possesion des Biens par lEtat et leur distribution aux communes. Je fis comprendre tout de suite limportance de ce tmoignage et lintrt tout particulier quil prsenterait pour le Comit. Le conseiller agricole fit noter que probablement le Dr. Gaal noserait pas exprimer cette mme opinion dune manire officielle, ce qui entranerait pour lui des difficults considrables. Dautre part, le Dr. Gaal habite Ditru, 80 km. de Miercurea Ciuc, et le temps matriel manquait pour le voir. Jai toutefois insist sur lintrt quil y a aurait pouvoir rencontrer le Dr. Gaal, et les fonctionnaires roumains ont vaguement envisag la possibilit de lui demander de venir le lendemain Bucarest, mais rien na t fait. Jai eu limpression quils navaient aucune confiance que le Dr. Gaal voudrait exprimer en ma prsence une opinion comme celle qui, daprs le conseiller agricole, il exprime dans des conversations prives. Toujours au cours du djeuner, M. Paclasiano, du Sous-Secrtariat pour les questions de minorits, mentionna un manifeste que le Dr. Pal Gabor aurait fait paratre dernirement dans la presse locale, demandant la population de ne fournir des informations daucune sorte sur la question, qui pourrait, peut-tre, contenir des lments permettant de mieux connatre les dessous politiques de laffaire, et jai pri M. Paclasiano de nous procurer le texte, ce quil ma promis de faire2. Finalement et bien quil nait pas de rapport avec la question des Biens Privs, je voudrais citer un cas auquel le conseiller agricole sest rfr au cours de notre entretien, sans doute pour montrer que des communes roumaines ont aussi des motifs de plainte: la commune hongroise de Lezera possderait comme compossessorat un pturage situ une grande distance, et dans lequel se trouverait enclav la commune roumaine de... 3. Afin de donner cette dernire la superficie ncessaire pour lentretien de son btail, il avait t dcid de lui attribuer une partie du compossessorat de Lezera. Cette dcision a t casse par le Comit agraire, avec ce rsultat que les habitants de la commune roumaine de... ne peuvent mme pas laisser sortir leurs btes de leurs maisons sans risquer de se voir dnoncs par les gardes de Lezera et forcs de payer des amendes. Jusqu prsent tous les efforts qui ont t faits pour persuader la commune de Lezera daccepter un arrangement qui remdierait la situation impossible de la commune roumaine sont rests sans rsultat.
1. Un des signataires de la premire ptition, et le signataire de le ptition relative aux pensions. 2. Le jour de mon dpart de Bucarest jai encore rappel sa promesse M. Paclasiano. 3. Malheureusement je nai pas retenu le nom de cette commune.

h). Orphelinat de Sumuleu. Le village de Sumuleu se trouve deux kilomtres peine de Miercurea Ciuc. Lorphelinat est install dans un grand et solide difice de deux tages, construit (comme tous les autres btiments des Biens) il y a environ un sicle, en pleine campagne, dans un endroit idal pour une institution de ce genre. Jai fait une visite extrmement dtaille de tout ltablisement: classes, dortoirs, chapelle, cuisine, dpendances de tout ordre et je nhsite pas dire quon trouvera trs difficilement quelque chose de suprieur et de plus soign comme tenue gnrale de linstallation.

Lordre et la proprit les plus parfaits que lon puisse imaginer; et ceci dans la plus grande modestie et simplicit, et mme dans la pauvret. En outre, lexpression et le regard des enfants ne permettraient pas de se tromper quant latmosphre cordiale de la maison et le bon esprit qui y rgne. Je crois quon pourrait citer lOrphelinat de Sumuleu comme un vritable modle. Dans lOrphelinat il y a 75 enfants, parmi lesquels 50 Hongrois et 25 Roumains. Le personnel est form de sept soeurs de St. Vincent de Paul, parmi lesquelles cinq Hongroises et deux Roumaines et une institutrice roumaine. La langue de la maison est en fait le hongrois; La Suprieure ne parle presque pas le roumain; linstitutrice une Roumaine de Transylvanie pleine de charme pour les enfants, nous a expliqu que bien que lenseignement doive tre donn en roumain, elle tait force de commencer la classe en expliquant en hongrois la mme chose quelle expliquait ensuite en roumain; autrement la plupart des enfants ne pourraient rien y comprendre. Les fonctionnaires se sont souvent adresss des enfants qui ne pouvaient pas comprendre le roumain et pendant toute notre visite la langue employe avec la Suprieure et les soeurs a t le hongrois et lallemand. Finalement, ce qui ma sembl lindication la plus intressante sur lesprit dans lequel linstitution vit actuellement: la Suprieure actuelle, qui semble tre une femme remarquablement doue pour sa mission, est la mme qui remplissait ces fonctions au moment de la prise de posession par lEtat roumain et ce qui est encore plus important cest elle qui dcide, en pleine libert, sur les admissions dans lOrphelinat; ma question sur le critre daprs lequel elle faisait le choix entre les orphelins candidats ladmission, elle a rpondu avec simplicit: Je prends le plus malheureux!. Conclusions: 1). Par la liquidation du patrimoine form par les Biens Privs, on a lev la culture hongroise de Transylvanie une importante source de revenus. Il est tout naturel que ce soit la bourgeoisie, plus sensible aux intrts culturels, qui ait ressenti avec plus de vivacit les consquences de cette mesure. Dautre part, il faut aussi tenir compte du fait que les lments politiques dirigeants ont vu du mme coup affaiblie leur influence politique et sociale dans le pays; ceci sapplique surtout ceux qui faisaient partie des organes chargs en fait de la grance et ladministration de ce patrimoine. Dans ces conditions il nest pas suprenant que ces lments slvent contre laction de lEtat et la considrent comme un attentat aux intrts les plus sacrs de la population hongroise du pays. 2). Dautre part, on pourrait se demander si ces sentiments sont partags, au moins avec la mme vivacit, par les paysans hongrois faisant partie de la population hongroise rurale. Dabord, la population rurale est beaucoup moins sensible que la bourgeoisie aux intrts intellectuels, qui ont t surtout frapps par la liquidation des Biens. En second lieu, une partie au moins de cette population sest trouve directement bnficie par la distribution de ces biens. Je serais par consquent enclin croire que de la part de la population hongroise rurale il y a eu soit de lindiffrence de la part de ceux qui nont rien reu, soit une satisfaction marque pour la population des communes ayant particip dans la distribution des forts et pturages. 3). La question de savoir si dans la distribution de la partie des forts et pturages certaines communes on sest inspir dun critre discriminatoire au dtriment des communes de population hongroise ne pourra tre rsolue qu la lumire des informations dtailles promises par le Gouvernement relativement la situation des communes bnficiaires et des communes exclues.

4). Etant donn lexistence dun grand gymnase confessionnel hongrois avec droit de publicit Miercurea Ciuc et dune cole secondaire de jeunes filles Gheorghieni, on pourrait considrer que la cration de classes parallles hongroises dans le lyce mixte de Miercurea Ciuc est de nature donner satisfaction aux besoins de la population hongroise. 5). La nomination dune institutrice pour lOrphelinat de Sumuleu semble galement pouvoir tre considre comme une mesure satisfaisante en ce qui concerne cette institution. 6). Finalement, en ce qui concerne la restitution du 50 % des forts et pturages rests en possession de lEtat, jai eu nettement limpression que les intresss ne pourraient dans aucun cas obtenir davantage. Les documents que jai examins dans loffice du Livre foncier de Miercurea Ciuc me semblent au moins de nature justifier la thse selon laquelle le patrimoine form par lensemble de ces biens tait loin de pouvoir tre considr comme un patrimoine priv, appartenant une personne juridique prive. Dans ces conditions, ma conclusion ce sujet serait favorable lacceptation de loffre du Gouvernement de restituer le 50 % des forts et pturages rests en sa possession. 13. IX. 1932 5. PABLO AZCARATE

NOT ASUPRA CLTORIEI MELE N ROMNIA

(SEPTEMBRIE 1932) CONFIDENIAL SECRETARULUI GENERAL [al Societii Naiunilor] mi permit s v remit o not care rezum cteva observaii pe care le-am putut face i informaii pe care le-am putut obine n cursul recentei mele cltorii n Romnia, referitoare la problema Bunurilor fostului regiment secuiesc1. Dac dumneavoastr nu vedei un inconvenient, gndesc c ar fi indicat s comunicai aceast not membrilor Comitetului. Comitetul se va ntruni marea viitoare i d-l Sawada ar dori ca n decursul acestei sptmni s stabileasc cu mine un proiect de raport, care s poat servi ca baz de discuie pentru Comitet. De ndat ce va fi gata eu voi transmite proiectul de raport, nainte de a-l comunica lui Sawada. 1. De la sosirea mea la Bucureti, n 1 septembrie, am vizitat, pe de o parte, pe subsecretarul de stat de la Ministerul Afacerilor Externe2 i pe de alt parte, pe ministrul Instruciunii Publice3, i pe ministrul Agriculturii4, ca efi ai departamentelor cele mai direct interesate n problema referitoare la Bunurile din Ciuc. Discuiile cu subsecretarul de stat de la Afacerile Externe i cu ministrul i subsecretarul de stat de la Instrucie Public au avut un caracter mai degrab general. Dimpotriv, ministrul Agriculturii, fr s intre n detaliile problemei, pe care prea totui c le cunoate de o manier destul de profund, a dezvoltat cu mult for teza juridic, care a fost de la nceput aceea a guvernului romn, i dup care, n cazul fostului Regiment secuiesc Bunurile erau n proprietatea statului i descendenii membrilor regimentului nu se bucurau dect de uzufruct, n timp ce n cazul celor dou regimente romneti din Nsud i Caransebe, descendenii membrilor erau adevrai

proprietari ai bunurilor. Ministrul a explicat ca motiv al acestei diferene faptul c proprietatea descendenilor membrilor celor dou regimente romneti a fost consfinit printr-o lege special ungureasc, ceea ce nu a fost cazul n privina Regimentului secuiesc. Dat fiindc acest aspect strict juridic al problemei nu face astzi obiectul examinrii nici de ctre Comitet, nici de ctre Consiliu, n-am crezut c trebuie s acord un interes special acestui subiect i am preferat s nu insist pentru a primi explicaii mai amnunite din partea ministrului Agriculturii. De altfel, acesta, care era la curent cu intenia mea de a face o vizit n judeul Ciuc, mi-a declarat c va lua msurile necesare de care voi avea nevoie. 2. n aceeai zi a avut loc la ministerul Afacerilor Externe (Secia pentru Societatea Naiunilor) o reuniune a funcionarilor superiori ai Ministerelor Agriculturii i Instruciunii Publice care au fost chemai s discute aceast problem. n afara de dl. Brabeianu, [foarte probabil Caius Brediceanu] secretar de Legaie la Secia Societii Naiunilor, a Ministerului Afacerilor Externe, au luat parte la aceast ntlnire dl. Caliani5, director general al nvmntului minoritilor; din partea ministerului Instruciunii Publice, din partea ministerului Agriculturii: un inspector forestier (al crui nume din nefericire, nu l-am putut reine) i dl. Avramescu, consilier juridic n circumscripia Arad i care luase parte, cu dl. Brediceanu la negocierile cu Comitetul de la Geneva n luna iunie a anului trecut. n cursul acestei reuniuni au fost examinate urmtoarele puncte: a). Msurile preconizate pentru a opera restituirea prevzut n ultimele propuneri supuse Comitetului de guvernul romn de 50% din pdurile i punile rmase n posesia statului La cererea ministrului Afacerilor Externe6, ministerul Agriculturii a pregtit dou variante, fiecare coninnd dou loturi ntre care Comitetul ar putea alege. Una din aceste alternative coninea dou loturi de o valoare i de o ntindere aproximativ egale. Cealalt, care va fi probabil cea pe care Ministerul Afacerilor Externe o va supune Comitetului, va conine dou loturi de o valoare i ntindere diferite, n sensul c cel mai mare (partea de nord, cu dou parcele izolate, situate n sud), va fi de o valoare inferioar lotului mai mic (partea central). Motivul pentru aceasta ar fi c cel din urm lot s-ar gsi n condiii de exploatare mai avantajoase dect primul, i anume din cauza faptului c el este traversat de ci de comunicaii importante. Dup cum am spus-o, guvernul va supune, probabil, Comitetului aceast din urm alternativ, cu toate informaiile de ordin tehnic i hrile necesare pentru ca el s poat face alegerea. Opinia inspectorului forestier care a pregtit acest studiu i care era prezent la reuniune opinie mprtit de toi ceilali funcionari prezeni era c interesul instituiei Bunurile private ar fi de a obine lotul mai mic i de o valoare mai mare. Ct privete statul, ei erau de prere c el ar avea mai degrab interesul s pstreze lotul mai mare i de o valoare inferioar. Venitul net al lotului mai mic i mai uor exploatabil era calculat de inspectorul forestier la circa 1.200.000 lei pe an adic 40.000 franci elveieni. b). Alegerea comunelor care au beneficiat de distribuirea pdurilor i a punilor nainte de a trece la un alt subiect am vrut s relev un punct, care mi se pare c prezint un interes deosebit, mai ales n ceea ce privete participarea populaiei maghiare la distribuirea pdurilor i a punilor care au fost atribuite anumitor comune sub form de bunuri comunale, punct al crui interes a fost subliniat n timpul discuiei de la Paris ntre dl. Sawada i Sir William Malkin n 19 august trecut. Eu am considerat c mijlocul cel mai practic de a ridica aceast problem era s m refer la alegaia concret cuprins n capitolul III al memoriului dl. Gbor din 27 iulie 1930 (doc. C. 174 / 1931, I, pagina 65). Conform acestei referiri, partea din bunurile care a fost distribuit ar fi fost atribuit comunelor din care o parte a populaiei i

cteodat o parte considerabil era romn, n timp ce comunele pur secuieti i mult mai apropiate de bunurile mprite (numele unui anumit numr din aceste comune sunt menionate) n-ar fi primit o parte oarecare n mprirea acestor bunuri. Am spus c ar fi cu siguran foarte interesant pentru Comitet s aib informaii foarte precise i detaliate care s-i permit s neleag criteriile dup care s-a fcut alegerea celor 10 comune beneficiare n distribuirea acestor bunuri i excluderea celor menionate de dr. Gbor, situate mai aproape de bunurile distribuite i de populaia maghiar. Inspectorul forestier ca i dl. Avramescu mi-au dat imediat o explicaie, dup care toate comunele ungureti menionate de dr. Gbor, posedau fie sub form de bunuri comunale, fie sub forma composesoratelor enorme ntinderi de pduri i de puni, adesea mult peste limita fixat de lege, n timp ce comunele crora bunurile din Ciuc le-au fost date erau fie n ntregime lipsite de pduri i de puni, fie n posesia de suprafee insuficiente. Ei au adugat chiar, c sunt chiar comune care nu numai c nu au primit nimic la distribuirea Bunurilor din Ciuc, dar care au fost obligate s cedeze n favoarea altor comune mai puin bogate o parte a pdurilor i punilor lor comunale. Mulumindu-le funcionarilor pentru aceast explicaie am insistat asupra interesului pe care Comitetul l are de a dobndi informaii care s-i permit s cunoasc situaia fiecrei comune beneficiare i a fiecrei comune exclus menionat de dl. Gbor, n ceea ce privete ntinderea pdurilor i punilor al cror proprietare erau n momentul n care a avut loc distribuirea Bunurilor din Ciuc. Inspectorul forestier a spus c va lua imediat msurile necesare pentru a pregti aceste informaii i dl. Brediceanu m-a anunat c acestea vor fi comunicate Comitetului ct mai repede posibil. Continuu s cred c fora moral a raportului, care va fi prezentat Comitetului, ar fi considerabil mrit dac ar putea s conin informaii detaliate privind diferitele comune citate de ctre petiionari i de natur a corecta teza formulat de acetia din urm. Sub rezerva unor informaii ulterioare, a putea aduga urmtoarea explicaie, care mi-a fost oferit n ceea ce privete cazul comunei Voslobeni, care este situat la o distan de 60 km. de pdurile i punile care i-au fost distribuite. n virtutea unei prime decizii, aceast comun a primit o parcel situat n apropierea ei, dar aceast hotrre a fost casat prin viciu de form de Comitetul Agrar. A trebuit s i se atribuie pduri i puni unde s-au gsit; a fost imposibil s se gseasc pduri i puni pentru ea situate la o distan mai mic. Pe de alt parte mi-au fost citate mai multe cazuri de comune maghiare care exploatau de mult timp pduri aflate la o distan mai mare dect cea dintre Volobeni i pdurile care i-au fost atribuite. c). Liceul din Miercurea Ciuc n prezent acest liceu este exclusiv romn. Dup anul 1931, din motive economice, este un liceu mixt, pentru biei i fete. n prezent, totalul elevilor, dup fuziune, este de 105, dintre care 46% romni i 54% maghiari. Numrul elevilor a sczut sensibil n ultimii ani din cauza, fr ndoial, a lipsei nvmntului n limba maghiar i a desfiinrii internatului. La acest subiect, dl. Caliani mi-a spus c n acelai ora, Miercurea Ciuc, este un gimnaziu romano-catolic cu drept de publicitate i la Gheorghieni este o coal secundar de fete ntreinute de clugrie catolice ambele instituii avnd internat. Iat acum cteva cifre privind ntreinerea acestui liceu. n 1923 Bunurile private ar fi pltit pentru personalul din nvmnt o sum de 117.000 lei. ntre 1923 i 1932 statul a pltit sume mergnd de la 304.000 lei n 1924 la 2.100.000 lei n 1928 i 508.188 n 1932. n final, dl. Caliani, director al nvmntului minoritar la Ministerul Instruciunii Publice, a declarat c datorit unor situaii speciale guvernul romn ar fi gata s creeze clase

paralele maghiare n liceu, chiar dac minimul de 30 de elevi, cerui de lege, pentru crearea acestor clase nu era atins. d). Orfelinatul din umuleu n orfelinat sunt acum 21 orfani romni i 52 maghiari: total 72. Din anul 1923 statul a pltit anual pentru ntreinerea orfelinatului 500.000 lei. n anul 1932 a pltit 400.000 lei. S-ar fi luat o hotrre pentru ca n orfelinat s fie doi nvtori: unul romn i unul maghiar. Dar fiind faptul c eu trebuia s vizitez aceste instituii n timpul cltoriei n judeul Ciuc, mi s-a prut inutil s insist pentru a obine, n acest moment, informaii mai amnunite. 3. Ziua de duminic, 4 septembrie, a fost consacrat unei vizite n oraul Miercurea Ciuc. n cltoria pe care am fcut-o cu automobilul i care ne-a ocupat ziua de smbt, am fost nsoit de dl. Brediceanu, de la Ministerul Afacerilor Externe i de dl. Avramescu. De ndat ce am intrat n judeul Ciuc am fost profund impresionat de caracterul pur maghiar al populaiei (limb, aspect exterior al satelor i al caselor, portul etc.) i de marea libertate i ncrederea cu care acest caracter maghiar se exteriorizeaz. n general, atunci cnd aveam nevoie de o informaie oarecare, trebuia s o cerem n limba maghiar, ceea ce dl. Avramescu, romn din Transilvania i cunoscnd maghiara ca pe propria sa limb [matern] fcea cu cea mai mare graie. n general, ranii, care rmneau un pic surprini dac li se adresa n limba romn, deveneau amabili i plini de bunvoin din clipa n care dl. Avramescu le vorbea n maghiar, i aceasta fr cel mai mic semn de jen sau de nencredere. Chiar dac nu mi dau seama de caracterul extrem de superficial i de fragilitatea acestor impresii, trebuie totui s spun c n msura n care un contact ca acesta permite s se fac o idee despre starea real de lucruri, n-am avut impresia c m gsesc n mijlocul unei populaii suferind presiunea unei politici de deznaionalizare din partea guvernului romn, aa cum este adesea descris n petiii sau n pres. Este regretabil c aceast impresie, mai degrab favorabil n privina manifestrilor vieii private a populaiei s fie deteriorat de grija cu care administraia a ndeprtat limba maghiar din inscripiile oficiale. n oraul Miercurea Ciuc am fost n legtur cu subprefectul judeului (prefectul fiind absent) i cu consilierul agricol. S-a decis c cel mai bun mod de a folosi timpul nostru ar fi s vizitm cldirile i instituiile cerute de petiionari i care se gsesc chiar n ora. De altfel, am crezut c trebuie s profit de vizita mea, pentru a putea examina personal forma sub care figureaz nscris n cartea funciar proprietatea Bunurilor private. Am vrut, nainte de a intra n problema nsi a Bunurilor din Ciuc, s obin cteva informaii cu un caracter mai general despre situaia populaiei maghiare n raport cu administraia public. Iat datele care mi-au fost furnizate de prefectur: Prefectura din Miercurea Ciuc: 41 de funcionari maghiari 9 funcionari romni Tribunalele: 4 judectori romni 7 judectori maghiari (judectorii romni vorbesc maghiara. Personalul inferior este maghiar) Serviciile tehnice de la Prefectur 50 de funcionari maghiari 6 funcionari romni

(Inginerul ef este maghiar). Administraia financiar 40 pn la 50 de funcionari dintre care 3 romni Serviciul forestier 1 ef romn 1 ef maghiar (toi funcionarii maghiari) Poliia: n oraul Miercurea Ciuc 10 ageni maghiari 10 romni Jandarmeria este recrutat din populaia regiunii. Printre cele 56 de comune ale judeului, exist 3 care au consilii comunale alese i 25 de Comisii interimare numite de guvern. Acestea din urm sunt n ntregime compuse din maghiari. Comisia interimar a oraului Miercurea Ciuc numit de guvern este format din 4 maghiari i 3 romni. Consiliul judeean numit de asemenea de guvern este format din 7 maghiari i 2 romni. a). Am nceput printr-o vizit la cazarm, care acum este ocupat de trupe de infanterie i despre care nu am observaii speciale de fcut. Este un edificiu mare, construit solid, i care greu ar putea fi dedicat unei alte utilizri dect celei creia i este dedicat acum. b). Mi s-a artat apoi terenul unde se gsea fosta coal agricol i pe care acum se construia o biseric ortodox. Explicaia deja dat de guvern mi-a fost repetat, i anume c edificiul colii agricole era n ntregime ruine i c a trebuit demolat. Construirea bisericii este n momentul de fa suspendat din cauza lipsei de fonduri. c). Teatrul Reduta adpostete n momentul de fa birourile districtului forestier i sala unui cinematograf. Edificiul este foarte bun i este situat n mijlocul oraului chiar n faa vilei n care locuiete dr. Gbor. Ca peste tot, placardele i afiele cinematografului sunt redactate n limbile romn i maghiar. d). Liceul este instalat ntr-un mod mai degrab modest ntr-o cldire mare i solid ale crei dimensiuni sunt mai degrab disproporionate fa de numrul relativ redus de elevi. Liceul este exclusiv romn, n consecin ntreg materialul de nvmnt registre de nmatriculare, anunuri, etc. este redactat exclusiv n limba romn. Din punctul de vedere al spaiului n-ar fi nici cea mai mic dificultate pentru instalarea claselor paralele maghiare. e). Am vizitat apoi, gimnaziul romano-catolic a crui somptuozitate contrasteaz cu liceul ( a se vedea fotografia). Am fost primii de ctre director care ne-a artat clasele, internatul, laboratoarele, muzeul, etc.; este vorba de o instituie confesional, ntreinut de Biserica romano-catolic din Transilvania i avnd drept de publicitate. nvmntul se face n maghiar, cu excepia geografiei, istoriei i educaiei civile, romna figureaz ca materie de nvmnt. Materialul de nvmnt registre, afie, etc. este exclusiv n maghiar. Vizitnd capela, (un funcionar care m nsoea, mi-a artat n mod discret c motivul decorativ cel mai nsemnat rmne coroana Sfntului tefan). n timpul vizitei am avut impresia c directorul gimnaziului i dl. Caliani care s-au ntreinut deseori n limba maghiar (directorul vorbete, de asemenea, limba romn) erau n cei mai buni termeni. n timpul vizitei noastre chiar n cldirea gimnaziului se inea un congres al intelectualilor din Transilvania. Dl. Caliani mi-a atras atenia c aceast ntrunire a fost convocat fr ca ministerul s fi fost anunat.

f). n biroul Registrului funciar am putut examina personal dosarul original maghiar al Bunurilor private. Prima parte a acestui dosar coninea o list a bunurilor aparinnd acestei instituii de cnd cartea funciar a fost introdus (1870). O a doua parte coninea indicaiile i referinele diferitelor achiziii sau vnzri fcute de titularii dosarelor. Punctul esenial era, dup prerea mea, de a verifica forma dup care era desemnat titularul de drept al proprietii asupra acestor bunuri. Aceast formul n maghiar este urmtoarea: Csik Megye Kzsge (comunitatea de bunuri a Comitatului Ciuc). Prima foaie a dosarului este rupt i cuvntul Kzsge [forma veche a cuvntului Kzsge] lipsete. Dar n toate nscrisurile privind vnzrile i cumprrile ulterioare anului 1870 figureaz formula complet. Am sugerat trimiterea la Comitet a originalului maghiar al acestui dosar sau cel puin al antetului. Un al doilea lucru interesant mi-a fost artat la cartea funciar i anume, textul original maghiar al unui contract de cumprare fcut de Bunurile private i n care se spune n mod expres. Reprezentani ai prefectului desemnai de acesta n virtutea unei rezoluii adaptate de ctre Adunare. Am fost anunat de asemenea c o copie a originalului acestui contract va fi comunicat Comitetului. g). n timpul unei vizite rapide la biroul consilierului agricol am ridicat din nou problema privitoare la motivele pentru care au fost alese anumite comune pentru distribuirea Bunurilor din Ciuc, excluzndu-se altele, mai apropiate. Consilierul agricol, repetnd aceeai explicaie care mi-a fost dat la Bucureti, mi-a spus c va pregti materialul necesar pentru a putea furniza informaiile care m intereseaz. De exemplu, el a menionat comuna Gheorghieni, citat de dl. Gbor i care posed, fie sub form de bunuri comunale, fie sub form de composesorate o ntindere de 30. 000 ha de pdure. h). n timpul prnzului luat ntr-un restaurant maghiar, unde toat lumea vorbea limba maghiar fr nici cea mai mic jen, am ncercat s cunosc prin Consilierul agricol al judeului adevratele sentimente ale populaiei rneti rurale maghiare n ceea ce privete mprirea Bunurilor. La ntrebrile mele el a rspuns fr cea mai mic ezitare c populaia rural maghiar era foarte mulumit i satisfcut de mprire, graie creia ea poate s beneficieze de pduri i puni ca i de bunuri comunale, n loc s fie obligat s plteasc, precum n trecut, arenzi la Administraia bunurilor. Ideea dominant era aceea c toat afacerea nu avea ca baz dect dorina dl. Pl Gbor de a-i ntri i de a-i pstra influena politic n regiune. Consilierul agricol se referea, n cursul discuiilor, la Dr. Gl, fost director al Bunurilor*, care, n conversaiile particulare nu i-ar fi ascuns prerea favorabil lurii n posesie a Bunurilor de ctre stat i mprirea lor ctre comune. Imediat l-am fcut s neleag importana acestei mrturii i interesul special pe care l prezint pentru Comitet. Consilierul agricol a remarcat faptul c probabil Dr. Gl nu ar ndrzni s exprime aceast prere n mod oficial, ceea ce i-ar aduce dificulti considerabile. Pe de alt parte Dr. Gl locuiete la Ditru, la 80 km. de Miercurea Ciuc i nu mai era timpul material necesar pentru a-l vedea. Eu am insistat totui asupra interesului care ar exista pentru a-l putea ntlni pe Dr. Gl, iar funcionarii romni au sugerat vag posibilitatea de a-i cere s vin n ziua urmtoare la Bucureti, dar nu s-a fcut nimic. Am avut impresia c ei nu credeau c Dr. Gl ar vrea s exprime n prezena mea o prere ca aceea care, dup Consilierul agricol, el o exprimase n conversaii particulare. Tot n timpul prnzului dl. Pclianu de la Subsecretariatul pentru problemele minoritilor a menionat un manifest pe care dl. Pl Gbor l-ar fi publicat recent n presa local, cernd populaiei s nu furnizeze informaii de nici un fel asupra problemei

care, ar putea conine poate elemente permind cunoaterea mai bun a dedesubturilor politice ale afacerii, iar eu l-am rugat pe dl. Pclianu s-mi procure textul pe care mi l-a promis**. n sfrit, dei nu are legtur cu problema Bunurilor private, a vrea s citez un caz la care consilierul agricol s-a referit n cursul convorbirii noastre, fr ndoial pentru a arta c i comunele romneti au motive s se plng: comuna maghiar Lzarea ar avea, ca i composesorat, o pune situat n mare distan i n care s-ar afla cuprins comuna romneasc*** . Pentru a-i da acesteia din urm suprafaa necesar ntreinerii vitelor s-a hotrt atribuirea unei pri a composesoratului Lzarea. Aceast decizie a fost casat de Comitetul agrar cu rezultatul c locuitorii comunei romneti nici mcar nu puteau lsa vitele s ias din gospodriile lor fr a risca s fie denunai de ctre paznicii din Lzarea i obligai s plteasc amenzi. Pn n prezent toate eforturile fcute pentru a convinge comuna Lzarea s accepte un aranjament care s remedieze situaia imposibil a comunei romneti au rmas fr rezultat.
* Unul din semnatarii primei petiii i semnatarul petiiei privitate la pensii. ** n ziua plecrii mele din Bucureti i-am reamintit dl. Pclianu promisiunea fcut. *** Din nefericire nu am putut reine numele acestei comune.

h). Orfelinatul din umuleu Satul umuleu se gsete la aproape 2 km. de Miercurea Ciuc. Orfelinatul este instalat ntr-o cldire mare i solid, construit, ca toate celelalte cldiri ale Bunurilor, cu aproximativ un secol n urm, n plin cmp, ntr-un loc ideal pentru o instituie de acest gen. Am fcut o vizit extrem de detaliat a ntregului stabiliment: case, dormitoare, capel, buctrie, dependine de tot felul, i nu m tem s spun c greu se gsete ceva superior i mai ngrijit ca inut general a instituiei. Ordinea i curenia perfect pe care o poi imagina, i totul n cea mai mare modestie i simplitate i chiar srcie. De altfel expresia i privirea copiilor nu ar permite s te neli n ceea ce privete atmosfera cordial a casei i spiritul bun, sntos care domnete acolo. Cred c orfelinatul de la umuleu s-ar putea cita ca un veritabil exemplu. n orfelinat se afl 75 de copii, dintre care 50 de maghiari i 25 de romni. Personalul este format din apte surori clugrie ale Sf. Vincent de Paul, printre care 5 unguroaice i dou romnce i o nvtoare romnc. Limba casei este de fapt maghiara. Maica Superioar nu vorbete aproape de loc romn. nvtoarea, o romnc din Transilvania, plin de farmec fa de copii, ne-a explicat c dei predarea ar trebui s se fac n limba romn, ea era obligat s-i nceap orele explicnd n maghiar acelai lucru pe care l explica apoi n limba romn; altfel, majoritatea copiilor nu ar fi putut nelege aproape nimic. Funcionarii romni s-au adresat deseori copiilor care nu puteau nelege romna i n timpul ntregii noastre vizite limbile vorbite cu Maica Superioar i surorile clugrie au fost limbile maghiar i german. n sfrit, indicaia care mi s-a prut cea mai interesant asupra spiritului n care triete instituia n momentul de fa: Maica Superioar de acum, care pare s fie o femeie deosebit de dotat pentru misiunea ei, este aceeai care ndeplinea aceste funcii n momentul lurii n posesie de ctre statul romn i, ceea ce este nc mai important, c este cea care decide, n deplin libertate asupra primirilor n orfelinat; la ntrebarea mea asupra criteriilor dup care face alegerea ntre orfanii candidai la primire, ea a rspuns cu simplitate: l iau pe cel mai nefericit.

Concluzii: 1). Prin lichidarea patrimoniului format de Bunurile private i s-a luat culturii maghiare din Transilvania o important sursa de venituri. Este normal ca burghezia, mai sensibil la interesele culturale, s fi resimit mai intens consecinele acestei msuri. Pe de alt parte trebuie s se in cont de faptul c elementele politice conductoare i-au vzut deodat slbit influena politic i social n regiune; aceasta se aplic mai ales celor care fceau parte din organele nsrcinate direct cu girarea i administrarea acestui patrimoniu. n aceste condiii nu este de mirare c aceste elemente se ridic mpotriva aciunii statului i o consider un atentat la interesele cele mai sacre ale populaiei maghiare din regiune. 2. Pe de alt parte, ne-am putut ntreba dac aceste sentimente sunt mprtite, cel puin cu aceeai intensitate de ctre ranii maghiari fcnd parte din populaia rural maghiar. n primul rnd populaia rural este mult mai puin sensibil dect burghezia la interesele intelectuale, care au fost mai ales lovite prin lichidarea Bunurilor. n al doilea rnd, o parte cel puin a acestei populaii a fost direct beneficiar a mpririi acestor bunuri. n consecin, a fi nclinat s cred c din partea populaiei rurale maghiare a existat fie indiferen din partea celor care nu au primit nimic, fie satisfacie pronunat din partea populaiei comunelor care au participat la mprirea pdurilor i punilor. 3). Problema de a ti dac n distribuirea prii de pduri i puni ctre comune s-a folosit un criteriu discriminatoriu n detrimentul comunelor de populaie maghiar nu va putea fi rezolvat dect n lumina informaiilor detaliate promise de guvern referitoare le comunele beneficiare i comunele excluse. 4). Dat fiind existena unui mare gimnaziu confesional maghiar cu drept de publicitate la Miercurea Ciuc i a unei coli secundare de fete la Gheorghieni s-ar putea spune c formarea de clase paralele maghiare n liceul mixt din Miercurea Ciuc este de natur s dea satisfacie nevoilor populaiei maghiare. 5). Numirea unei nvtoare pentru orfelinatul din umuleu poate fi de asemenea considerat ca o msur satisfctoare n ceea ce privete aceast instituie. 6). n sfrit, n ceea ce privete restituirea a 50% din pdurile i punile rmase n posesia statului, eu am avut clar impresia c interesaii nu vor putea n nici un caz s obin avantaje. Documentele pe care le-am examinat n Oficiul crii funciare din Miercurea Ciuc mi se par cel puin de natur s justifice teza conform creia patrimoniul format de ansamblul acestor bunuri era departe de a putea fi considerat un patrimoniu particular, aparinnd unei persoane juridice particulare. n aceste condiii concluzia mea n legtur cu acest subiect ar fi favorabil acceptrii ofertei guvernului de a restitui 50% din pdurile i punile rmase n posesia sa.
NOTE 1. Problematica referitoare la Bunurile private din Ciuc a fost mult discutat, att n ar, ct i la Societatea Naiunilor. Poziia oficial romneasc era c membrii fostului regiment de grani din regiune n-au avut dreptul de proprietate asupra pmnturilor i pdurilor, ci doar unul de folosin. Prin comparaie, regimentele grnicereti romneti de la Orlat i Nsud erau proprietari deplini. n cazul primilor, legea de reform agrar s-a aplicat prin Hotrrea Comitetului Agrar nr. 11 din 26 februarie 1923, patrimoniul formnd proprietatea fostului regiment a trecut n proprietatea statului, fr vreo despgubire. n schimb romnii n-au pierdut nimic prin acea lege. Urmaii grnicerilor din Ciuc s-au adresat Ligii Naiunilor cernd din partea statului un tratament egal cu al romnilor. Procedura privind protecia locuitorilor secui din zon s-a pornit i a cunoscut mai multe etape i s-a prelungit n timp.

n cele din urm Rezoluia din 1932 a Societii Naiunilor a cutat s dea problemei o soluie de ordin practic, amnndu-se rezolvarea ei definitiv. Pe aceast baz, guvernul romn, prin legea din 17 iulie 1934, se obliga s restituie urmailor grnicerilor o parte a bunurilor imobiliare i toate bunurile mobile. Condiia pentru aceasta a fost ca cei despgubii s renune la alte pretenii ulterioare. i lucrurile nu s-au ncheiat aici. n afara lucrrilor scrise de V. Boteni, A. Balogh, S. Bir, credem c sunt mai puin cunoscute documentele depistate n fondul Preedinia Consiliului de Minitri, elaborate de avocatul dr. Zentai Ern, n numele Comunitii de Avere, i de avocatul Ion Hamzea care aducea argumente pentru punctul de vedere oficial romnesc. 2. Grigore Gafencu. 3. Dimitrie Gusti, ministrul Instruciunii Publice, Cultelor i Artelor. 4. Voicu Niescu. 5. Augustin Caliani. 6. Alexandru Vaida-Voevod, prim-ministru i ministru al Afacerilor Externe.

BIBLIOGRAFIE SELECTIV
I. ARHIVE 1. Arhivele Ministerului de Externe ale Romniei, Bucureti, fondul Geneva. 2. Arhivele Naionale ale Marii Britanii, Londra, fondul Ministerul de Externe (Public Record Office, Foreign Office P. R. O. F. O.). 3. Arhivele Naionale ale Romniei, Bucureti, fondurile Ministerul Propagandei Naionale i Preedinia Consiliului de Minitri, microfilme. 4. Arhivele Naionale ale Ungariei, Budapesta, fondul Ministerul de Externe (Magyar Orszgos Levltr, Budapest, fondul Klgyi Ministerium). 5. Arhivele Societii Naiunilor, Elveia, Geneva, fond Secretariat (Archives de la Socit des Nations, ASDN).

II. LUCRRI GENERALE I SPECIALE 1. Azcarate, Pablo, League of Nations and National Minorities: An Experiment. New York: Klaus Reprint (Erstausgabe: Washington: Carnegie Endowment, 1945), 1972. 2. Abraham, Dorel, Bdescu, Ilie, Chelcea, Septimiu, Interethnic Relations in Romania. Sociological Diagnosis and Evaluation of Tendencies, Cluj-Napoca, 1995. 3. Aufricht, Hans, Guide to the League of Nations. Publications: Survey of the Work of the League 1920-1947, New York, 1951. 4. Balsz, Andrs, Urkunden zu den Kmpfen im Schutze der Minderheitsschulen in Siebenbrgen 1919-1929, Lugoj, 1931.

5. Baling, Mads Ole, Von Reval bis Bukarest. Statistischbiographisches Handbuch der Parlamentarier der deutschen Minderheiten, in Ost-, Mittel- und Sdosteuropa, 1919-1945, vol. 1-2, Kopenhagen Dokumentation Verlag, Copenhaga, 1991. 6. Balogh, Arthur, Die Angelegenheit der Szekler Gtergemeinschaft von den Vlkerbund, Lugoj, 1932. 7. Idem, Die internationale Schutz der Minderheit, Mnchen, 1928. 8. Brbulescu, Petre, La Socit des Nations: une grande exprience pour lhumanit, in: Revue roumaine dtudes internationales, 1981, 15 (1), p. 55-67. 9. Brsnescu, tefan, Brsnescu, Florela, Dicionar cronologic. Educaia, nvmntul, gndirea pedagogic n Romnia, Bucureti, 1978. 10. Bein, Daniel, Madjarische ethnographische Gruppen in Rumnien, in: Siebenbrgische Semesterbltter, Mnchen, 1990, 4, nr. 1-2, p. 109-120. 11. Bell, Karl, Das Deutschtum im Ausland. Siebenbrgen, Dresden, 1930. 12. Bibliografia istoric a Romniei, vol. I, IV-IX, Bucureti, 1970, 1975, 1980, 1985, 1990, 1995, 2000. 13. Bibliographisches Handbuch der ethnischen Gruppen Sdosteuropas, ed. Gerhard Seewann i Peter Dipold, vol. I-II, Mnchen, R. Oldenbourg Verlag, 1997. 14. Binder, Ludwig, Scheerer, Josef, Die Bischfe der evangelischen Kirche A. B. in Siebenbrgen. II. Teil: Die Bischfe der Jahre 1867-1969, Bhlau Verlag, Kln, Wien, 1980. 15. Bir Sndor, Nationalities Problem in Transylvania 1867-1940, Distributed by Columbia University Press, New York, 1992. 16. Bocu, Sever, La question du Banat. Roumains et Serbes, Paris, 1919. 17. Bodea, Cornelia, Seton-Watson, Hugh, R. W. Seton-Watson i romnii. R. W. Seton-Watson and the Romanians, vol. II, Bucureti, 1988. 18. Boito, Olimpiu, Le progrs culturel en Transylvanie de 1918 1940, in: Revue de Transylvanie, 1941-1943, 7-9, p. 113-209. 19. Boteni, Viorica, Les minorits en Transylvanie, Paris, 1938. 20. Bozga, Vasile, Criza agrar n Romnia dintre cele dou rzboaie mondiale, Bucureti, 1975. 21. Brandsch, Heinz, Geschichte der siebenbrgisch-schsischen Volksschule, Sighioara, 1926. 22. Brtianu, Gheorghe I., Origines et formation de lunit roumaine, Bucureti, 1943. 23. Butler, Sir Geoffrey, A Handbook to the League of Nations, London, 1919, 1925 i 1928.

24. Cabot, John H., The Racial Conflict in Transylvania, The Beacon Press Inc., Boston, Massachussets, 1926. 25. Caliani, Aug., Lenseignement minoritaire en Transylvanie, in: Revue de Transylvanie, 1934. 26. Idem, Die Kirche der Minderheitengruppen Rumniens, in: Siebenbrgen, vol. II, Bucureti, 1934, p. 611-634. 27. Campus, Eliza, Din politica extern a Romniei 1913-1947, Bucureti, 1980. 28. Carmilly-Weinberger, Cluj-Napoca, 1996. Moshe, Istoria evreilor din Transilvania (1623-1994),

29. Castellan, George, A History of the Romanians, New York, 1989. 30. Cernea, Radu, Le problme minoritaire. La Roumanie et le rvisionisme, Paris, 1936. 31. Chmelar, Joseph, Les minorits nationales en Europe Centrale, Praga, 1937. 32. Ciato, Aurel, Problema minoritar la noi, Cluj, 1927. 33. Ciobanu, Vasile, Contribuii la cunoaterea istoriei sailor transilvneni 1918-1944, Sibiu, 2001. 34. Idem, Hans Otto Roth (1890-1953) cel mai strlucit reprezentant politic al germanilor din Romnia n secolul al XX-lea, in: Convergene transilvane, Sibiu, vol. 1, 1993, p. 48-60. 35. Cipianu, George, La rscruce (toamna anului 1917 primvara lui 1918). Marea Britanie i ncheierea de ctre Romnia a unei pci separate. At the Crossroad (Fall 1917 Spring 1918). Great Britain and Romanias Making of a Separate Peace, Oradea, 1993. 36. Csucsuja, Istvn, Istoria pdurilor din Transilvania (1848-1914), Cluj-Napoca, 1998. 37. Idem, Partidul Social Democrat din Romnia i problema minoritilor n perioada interbelic, in: Anuarul Institutului de Istorie, Cluj-Napoca, 1993, 32 p. 265-272. 38. Cuthbertson, Ian M., Leibowitz, Jones (ed.), Minorities: the New Europes Old Issue, Boulder, Colorado: West-View Press, 1993. 39. Dami, Aldo, Les nouveaux marthyrs: destin des minorits, Paris, 193???. 40. Dasclu, Nicolae, Minoritile naionale n Romnia Mare (1918-1940), in: Revista romn de studii internaionale, 1990, 24, nr. 3-4, p. 195-207. 41. Dacovici, N., Interesele i drepturile Romniei n texte de drept internaional public, Iai, 1936. 42. Idem, Principiul Naionalitilor i Societatea Naiunilor, Bucureti, 1922. 43. Dezvoltare i modernizare n Romnia interbelic 1919-1939. Culegere de studii, Bucureti, 1988.

44. Die Deutschen in Ostmittel- und Sdosteuropa, vol. 1-2, coord. Gerhard Grimm i Christa Zach, Verlag Sdostdeutsches Kulturwerk, Mnchen, 1995. 45. Diaconu, Ion, Minoritile. Statut. Perspective, Institutul romn pentru drepturile omului, Bucureti, 1996. 46. Dima, G. A., coala secundar n lumina Bacalaureatului. Constatri. Date statistice. Preri i propuneri, Bucureti, 1928. 47. Documents and Readings in the History of Europe since 1918, New York, 1969. 48. Dragomir, Silviu, La Transylvanie roumaine et ses minorits ethniques, Bucureti, 1934. 49. Drganu, Tudor, Les dcisions dAlba-Iulia et leur interprtation par les minorits nationales de Roumanie, extras, Bucureti, 1945. 50. Edroiu, Nicolae, Puca, Vasile, Les Hongrois de Roumanie, Cluj-Napoca, 1995. 51. Eisenburger, Eduard, Brandsch Rudolf, Zeit- und Lebensbild eines Siebenbrger Sachsen, Cluj-Napoca, 1983. 52. Fouques-Duparc, Jacques, La Protection des Minorits de Race, Langue et de Religion: tude de Droit des Gens, Paris, 1922. 53. Galntai, Jzsef, Trianon and the Protection of Minorities, Budapest, 1992. 54. Grboviceanu, Petre, Minoritile din Romnia, Bucureti, 1928. 55. Georgescu, Vlad, Istoria Romnilor. De la origini pn n zilele noastre, Bucureti, 1992. 56. Ghidionescu, Vladimir, Lenseignement roumain en Transylvanie, Sibiu, 1945. 57. Ghebali, Victor-Yves, Bibliographical Handbook on the League of Nations / Manuel Bibliographique sur la Socit des Nations, vol. I-II, Geneva, 1986. 58. Idem, Ghebali, Catherinne, A Repertoire of the League of Nations Serial Documents 1919-1947, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, vol. I-III, Ocean Publications, 1973. 59. Gllner, Carl, Die Stellungnahme der Siebenbrger Sachsen zur Vereinigung Transsilvaniens mit Rumnien, in: Forschungen zur Volks- und Landeskunde, 1966, nr. 2, p. 29-38. 60. Glner, Ralf Thomas, Der ungarisch-rumnische Nationalitten- konflikt in Siebenbrgen im Spiegel der Volkszhlungen von 1910, 1920 und 1930, in: Siebenbrgische Semesterbltter, Mnchen, 1993, 7, Heft 1-2, p. 83-101. 61. Greffner, Otto, Populaia vbeasc (german) din Banat. Cine sunt, cnd au venit i de unde?, Arad, 1994. 62. Gndisch, Konrad G., Siebenbrgen und die Siebenbrger Sachsen, Langen Mller, Mnchen, 1998. 63. Handbuch der europischen Volksgruppen, ed. Manfred Szraka, Viena, 1970.

64. Herman, Joost, De Volkenbond en het te fezicht of de volkenrechtelijke bescherming van nationale minderheden in Oost-Europa. Een interdisciplinaire benadering, Utrecht, 1994. 65. Hgel, Kaspar, Das Banater deutsche Schulwesen in Rumnien von 1918 bis 1944, Mnchen, 1967. 66. Iacobescu, Mihai, Activitatea Romniei la Societatea Naiunilor n problema ocrotirii minoritilor naionale (1919-1935), in: Anuarul Institutului de Istorie i Arheologie Cluj-Napoca, 1982, 25, p. 149-175. 67. Idem, Romnia i Societatea Naiunilor. 1919-1929, Bucureti, 1988. 68. Iancu, Carol, Lmancipation des Juifs de Roumanie (1913- 1919), Montpellier, 1992. 69. Idem, Les Juifs en Roumanie 1919-1938: de lmancipation la marginalisation, Paris-Louvain, 1996. 70. Iancu, Gheorghe, Chestiunea minoritilor etnice din Romnia n context internaional (1919-1933) (descrieri de cltorie), in: Anuarul Institutului de Istorie din Cluj-Napoca, 1997, 36, p. 159-176. 71. Idem, Consideraii cu privire la Romnia i problema minoritilor naionale, (Text i n limba francez, german), in: Minoritile naionale din Romnia 1918-1925. Documente, coord. I. Scurtu, L. Boar, Bucureti, 1995, p. 35-58. 72. Idem, Contribuia Consiliului Dirigent la consolidarea statului naional unitar romn (1918-1919), Cluj-Napoca, 1985. 73. Idem, Der deutsche Konsul in Kronstadt ber die Verhltnisse in Rumnien (Dezember 1918 Dezember 1919), in: Siebenbrgische Semesterbltter, Mnchen, 1993, 7, Heft 1-2, p. 111-128. 74. Idem, Establishing of the Romanian State Life in Transylvania after the Great Union of 1918, in: Nouvelles tudes dhistoire, vol. VIII, Bucureti, 1990, p. 221-235. 75. Idem, Die Haltung der Siebenbrger Sachsen zur Vereinigung Siebenbrgens mit Rumnien, in: Siebenbrgische Semesterbltter, 1998, 12, Heft 1-2, p. 260-268. 76. Idem, Imagini etnice i confesionale din Romnia n documente de arhiv britanice (1924-1926), in: Democraia n Europa Central i de Sud-Est. Aspiraie i realitate (secolele XIX i XX), coord. Sabine Habersack, Vasile Puca, Viorel Ciubot, Satu Mare, 2001, p. 113-121. 77. Idem, Informations concernant le problme des minorits nationales de Roumanie dans les documents de la Socit des Nations (1923-1926), in: Transylvanian Review, 1992, nr. 1, p. 29-55. 78. Idem, Die politische Haltung der Banater Schwaben im Jahre 1919, in: Kulturraum mittlere und untere Donau: Traditionen und Perspektiven des Zusammenlebens / Spaiul cultural al Dunrii mijlocii i inferioare: tradiii i perspective ale convieuirii, Reia, 1995, p. 199-203.

79. Idem, The Position of the Ethnical Minorities towards the Union of Transylvania with Romania, in: La fin de la Premire Guerre Mondiale et la nouvelle architecture gopolitique europene, coord. George Cipianu, Vasile Vesa, Cluj-Napoca, 2000, p. 213-228. 80. Idem, Problema minoritilor din Romnia n organizaii internaionale (1918-1940), in: Transilvania ntre medieval i modern, partea a II-a, coord. Camil Mureanu, Cluj-Napoca, 1997, p. 37-45. 81. Idem, Problema minoritilor etnice din Romnia reflectat n documente ale Societii Naiunilor (1919-1930), in: Relaii interetnice n zona de contact romno-maghiaro-ucrainean din secolul al XVIII-lea pn n prezent, coord. Viorel Ciubot, Satu Mare, Tbingen, 1999, p. 196-199. 82. Idem, Protecia minoritilor etnice n perioada interbelic, in: Transilvania ntre medieval i modern, partea I, coord. Camil Mureanu, Cluj-Napoca, 1996, p. 96-103. 83. Idem, The Ruling Council. The Integration of Transylvania into Romania 1918-1920, Cluj-Napoca, 1995. 84. Idem, Vorlufige Betrachtungen hinsichtlich Rumniens und die Frage der nationalen Minderheiten (1918-1928), in: Transylvanian Review, 1992, nr. 2, p. 63-81. 85. Idem, Cipianu, George, La consolidation de lUnion de la Transylvanie et de la Roumanie (1918-1919). Tmoignages franaises, Bucharest, 1990. 86. Idem, Minorities in Interwar Romania and the League of Nations, in: Transylvanian Review, 1996, nr. 2, p. 136-147. 87. Illys Elemr, National Minorities in Romania. Change in Transylvanaia, Boulder, New York, 1982. 88. [Informaii despre evoluia nvmntului din Transilvania 1918-1928], in: Transilvania, Banatul, Criana, Maramureul 1918-1920, vol. II, Bucureti, 1929. 89. Iorga, Nicolae, Istoria Romnilor, vol. X, Bucureti, 1939. 90. Ivan, Adrian Liviu, La question des nationalits de Transylvanie, Cluj-Napoca, 1999. 91. Jakabffy Elemr, Nemzetisg politikai irsok (Etudes de politique minoritaire), coord. Balzs Sndor, Bucureti, 1993. 92. Johnson, Paul, A History of the Modern World: from 1917 to the 1990s, ed. revizuit, Weidenfeld and Nicolson, Londra, 1991. 93. Kausch, Michael, Schicksalswende im Leben des Banater Deutschen Volkes, vol. I, Timioara, 1939. 94. Kolar, Othmar, Rumnien und seine nationalen Minderheiten, von 1918 bis heute, Viena-Kln-Weimar, 1997.

95. Knig, Walter, Das Schulwesen der Siebenbrger Sachsen in der Zwischenkriegszeit, in: Siebenbrgen zwischen den beiden Weltkriegen, coord. W. Knig, Bhlau Verlag, Kln, Viena, 1994, p. 265-300. 96. Kotzian, Ortfried, Das Schulwesen der Deutschen in Rumnien im Spannungsfeld zwischen Volksgruppe und Staat, Augsburg, 1983. 97. Kver, Gustave, Histoire dune trahison: le calvar des minorits nationales et la Socit des Nations, Geneva, 1939. 98. Krizman, Bogdan, The Belgrade Armistice of 13th November 1918, in: The Slavonic and East European Review, 1970, 48, nr. 110, p. 67-87. 99. Kurze Geschichte Siebenbrgens, ed. Kpeczi Bla, Budapesta, 1988. 100. Lszl Antal G. /Antal Gza/, Situaia minoritii etnice maghiare n Romnia, Odorheiul Secuiesc, f. a. 101. Lehrer, Milton C., Ardealul, pmnt romnesc. Problema Ardealului vzut de un american, Cluj-Napoca, 1991. 102. Lengyel Zsolt K., Auf der Suche nach dem Kompromiss. Ursprnge und Gestalten des frhen Transsilvanismus 1918-1928, Mnchen, 1993. 103. Idem, stliche Schweiz und Siebenbrgen 1918/1919. Aus der Geschichte der ungarischen Alternativvorstellungen zur grossrumnischen Staatsidee, in: Siebenbrgische Semesterbltter, Mnchen, 1992, 6, Heft. 2, p. 112-130. 104. Livezeanu, Irina, Cultur i naionalism n Romnia Mare 1918-1930, trad. din engl. Vlad Russo, Bucureti, 1998. 105. Lupan, Simion, Adrian Onofreiu, Grigore Avram, Ioan Murean, Luca Pupz, Pdurile judeului Bistria-Nsud din cele mai vechi timpuri i pn astzi, Bistria, 2001. 106. Macartney, C. A., Hungary and her Successors. The Treaty of Trianon and its Consequences 1919-1937, Oxford University Press, Londra, New York, Toronto, 1937. 107. Madgearu, Virgil, Agrarianism, capitalism, imperialism. Contribuii la studiul evoluiei sociale romneti. Studiu introductiv, note explicative i ediie ngrijit de Ludovic Bthory. Cluj-Napoca, Ed. Dacia, 1999. 108. Mair, L. P., The Protection of the Minorities, Londra, 1928. 109. Mandelstam, Andr N., La Protection des Minorits, Paris, 1925. 110. Manuil, Sabin, Aspects dmographiques de la Transylvanie, Bucureti, 1938. 111. Meitani, Radu, Istoria politic a raporturilor dintre state de la 1856-1930, Bucureti, 1943. 112. Mik Imre, Huszonkt v. Az erdlyi magyarsg politikai trtnete 1918 December 1-tl 1940 Augusztus 30-ig, Budapesta, 1941.

113. Minderheit und Nationalstaat. Siebenbrgen seit dem Ersten Weltkrieg, ed. Harald Roth, Bhlau Verlag, Kln, Weimar, Wien, 1995. 114. Le minoranze tra le due guerre, coord. Umberto Corsini i Davide Zaffi, Societ editrice il Mulino, Bologna, 1993. 115. Minoritile naionale din Romnia 1918-1925. Documente, vol. I, coord. Ioan Scurtu, Liviu Boar, Bucureti, 1995; vol. II 1925-1931, coord. Ioan Scurtu, Ioan Dordea, Bucureti, 1996. 116. Mouton, Marie-Rene, La Socit des Nations et la protection des minorits. Exemple de la Transylvanie (1920-1928), Grenoble, 1969. 117. Mozes, Tereza, Evreii din Oradea, trad. de Liviu Borcea, Bucureti, 1997. 118. Nstase, Adrian, Documenta universales. Drepturile persoanelor aparinnd minoritilor naionale. Reglementri n dreptul romneasc 1918-1989, vol. III, Ediie ngrijit de Roxana Frailich, Bucureti, 1998. 119. Neagoe, Stelian, Istoria guvernelor Romniei. De la nceputuri 1859 pn n zilele noastre 1995, Bucureti, 1995. 120. Negrea, Camil, Evoluia legislaiei n Transilvania de la 1918 pn astzi, Sibiu, 1943. 121. Nouzille, Jean, Transilvania, zon de contacte i conflicte, Bucureti, 1995. 122. Onate, Ana-Rosa, La SDN et les ptitions des minorits hongroises, Geneva, 1991. 123. Ormos, Mria, La Convention militaire de Belgrade en 1918, in: Acta Historica, Budapest, 1979, 25, nr. 1-2, p. 27-60. 124. Idem, From Padua to the Trianon, Budapest, 1990. 125. Our Racial and National Minorities, ed. Francisc J. Brown i Joseph Roucek, New York, 1937. 126. Pclianu, Zenovie, Politica minoritar a guvernelor ungureti 1867-1918, Bucureti, 1943. 127. Pan, Virgil, Minoritile etnice din Transilvania ntre 1918-1940, Trgu-Mure, 1996. 128. Pascu, tefan, The Making of the Romanian Unitary National State 1918, Bucureti, 1988. 129. Pearson, Raymond, National Minorities in Eastern Europe, 1848-1945, New York: St. Martins Press, 1993. 130. Pomogts Bla, Aspirations des Hongrois de la Transylvanie vers lauthonomie 1918-1921, in: Forschungen ber Siebenbrgen und seine Nachbarn, ed. Klmn Benda, Thomas von Bogyay, Horst Glassel, Lengyel Zsolt K., vol. 2, Mnchen, 1980, p. 81-90. 131. Popovici, Iosif, Problema colilor minoritare din Ardeal i Banat, Cluj, 1925. 132. La protection des minorits, in: Dix ans de coopration interna-tionale, Geneva, 1930.

133. Protection des minorits de langue, de race ou de rligion par la Socit des Nations. Rsolutions et extraits de procs-verbaux du Conseil, rsolutions et rapports adopts par LAssemble, relatif la procedure suivre dans les minorits, 1931. 134. Puca, Vasile, The Process of Modernization in Romania in the Interwar Period, in: East European Quarterly, 1991, vol. XXV, nr. 3, p. 325-338. 135. Raffay Ern, Erdly 1918-1919, Budapest, 1988. 136. Rdulescu, Andrei, Unificarea legislativ, Bucureti, 1927. 137. Reinerth, Karl M., Die Deutschen Siebenbrgens zwischen den Weltkriegen, in: Siebenbrgische Semesterbltter, 1990, 4, Heft 1-2, p. 32-51. 138. Robinson, Jacob, Were the Minorities Treaties a Failure?, New York, 1943. 139. Romania. National, Ethnic, Linguistic and Religious Minorities, sub red.: Petru Gavrilescu, 1993. 140. Romsics, Ignc, Graf Istvn Bethlens Konzeption eines unabhngigen oder autonomen Siebenbrgen, in: Ungarisches Jahrbuch, 1987, vol. 15, p. 74-93. 141. Roth, Hans Otto, Ideologia i tendinele politice ale minoritii germane, in: Doctrinele partidelor politice. 19 prelegeri publice organizate de Institutul Social Romn, Bucureti, p. 239-247. 142. Roth, Harald, Abschliessender Bericht des Deutsch-Schsischen Nationalrats fr Siebenbrgen (5. November 1919), in: Sieben-brgische Semesterbltter, 1992, 6, Heft. 1, p. 55-56. 143. Idem, Der Deutsch-Schsische Nationalrat fr Siebenbrgen 1918/1919, Mnchen, 1993. 144. Rotschild, Joseph, East Central Europe between the Two World Wars, 1974. 145. Roucek, Joseph S., Contemporary Romania and her Problems. A Study in Modern Nationalism, Stanford University Press, 1932. 146. Das Schulwesen der Volksgruppen in Siebenbrgen unter Magyaren und Rumnen, Bucureti, 1940. 147. Scolt, George, The Rise and Fall of the League of Nations, New York, Macmillan, 1974. 148. Seianu, Romulus, Principiul naionalitilor, Bucureti, 1996. 149. Seton-Watson, R. W., Histoire des Roumains. De lpoque romaine lachievement de lunit, Paris, 1937. 150. Idem, Treaty Revision and the Hungarian Frontiers, Londra, 1934. 151. Siebenbrgen (Culegere de studii), vol. I-II, Bucureti, 1943. 152. Sofronie, George, Lautodetermination des Roumains de Transylvanie en 1918, comme fondement juridique de lunit nationale, Bucureti, 1944.

153. Idem, Le principe des nationalits et les traits de paix de 1919/1920, Bucureti, 1937. 154. Idem, Proteciunea minoritilor de ras, limb i de religie sub regimul Societii Naiunilor, Oradea, 1930. 155. Spector, Sherman David, Romnia i Conferina de Pace de la Paris. Diplomaia lui I. C. Brtianu, Institutul European, Iai, 1995. 156. Staedel-Schneider, Gudrun, Rumnien und der Vlkerbund, in: Minderheit und Nationalstaat. Siebenbrgen seit dem Ersten Weltkrieg, ed. Harald Roth, Bhlau Verlag, Kln, Weimar, Wien, 1995, p. 73-85. 157. Suciu, Dumitru, Antecedentele dualismului austro-ungar i micarea naional a romnilor din Transilvania (1848-1867), Bucureti, 2000. 158. Idem, Micarea antidualist a romnilor n Austro-Ungaria i Ilie Mcelariu (1867-1891), Bucureti, 2002. 159. Szsz, Zsombor, The Minorities in Romanian Transylvania, London, 1927. 160. andru, Dumitru, Reforma agrar din 1921 n Romnia, Bucureti, 1975. 161. tirban, Marcel, Integration of Transylvania within the Unitary Romanian State 1918-1940, in: Transylvanian Review, vol. II, nr. 3, 1993, p. 32-54. 162. Idem, Din istoria Romniei 1918-1921. Probleme ale vieii politice, economice i sociale, Cluj-Napoca, 1987. 163. Teutsch, Friedrich, Geschichte der Siebenbrger Sachsen fr das schsische Volk, vol. 4, 1868-1919, Sibiu, 1926. 164. Transilvania, Banatul, Criana, Maramureul 1918-1928 (Culegere de studii), vol. I-III, Bucureti, 1929. 165. Transilvania i saii ardeleni n istoriografie. Din publicaiile Asociaiei de Studii Transilvane, Heidelberg, Sibiu, 2001. 166. La Transylvanie, Paris, 1946. 167. Truhart, Herbert V., Vlkerbund und Minderheitenpetitionen. Ein Beitrag zum Studium des Nationalittenproblems, Wien, Leipzig, 1931. 168. Varjassy, Louis, Rvolution, bolchvisme, raction (Histoire de loccupation franaise en Hongrie en 1918-1919), Paris, 1924. 169. Veiter, Theodor, Nationalittenkonflikt und Volksgruppenrecht im ausgehenden 20. Jahrhundert, vol. I, Wien, 1984. 170. Vesa, Vasile, Romanian-American Spiritual Interferences in Fundamental Acts of the Great Union in 1918, in: Transylvanian Review, vol. II, nr. 3, 1993, p. 24-31. 171. Vilain, Ch., Les quatre armistices de 1918, Paris, 1968.

172. Wagner, Ernst, Geschichte der Siebenbrger Sachsen. Ein berblick, Thaur bei Innsbruck, 1990. 173. Walters, Francis, A History of the League of Nations, vol. I-II, London, New York i Toronto, 1960. 174. Walters, Frank P., A History of the League of Nations, vol. I-II, Oxford University Press, London, 1952, 1969. 175. Winkler, W., Statistisches Handbuch der europischen Minderheiten, Wien, 1931. 176. Zach, Cornelius Radu, Der Status der Siebenbrger Sachen in Romnien Gesetzliche Verankerung und Wirklichkeit, in: Aspekte ethnischen Identitt, herausgegeben von Edgar Hosch und Gerhard Seewan, Mnchen, 1991. 177. Idem, Der Vlkerbund und der Minderheitenschutz in Rumnien 1920-1939, in: Siebenbrgische Semesterbltter, 1991, 5 Heft 1, p. 41-49. 178. Die Zeit in der Zeitung. Beitrge zur rumniendeutschen politischen Publizistik, Cluj-Napoca, 1977. 179. 1918 la romni, vol. II-V, Bucureti, 1983, 1986, 1986, 1986.