Site designed and created by Razvan Paraianu.
© Created in January 2001, Last revised: January 3, 2004

 

RACIAL PROBLEMS

IN

HUNGARY

By

SCOTUS VIATOR

Appendice 22

 

 

 

 


Back to the Table of Content


 

APPENDIX XXII

THE SZENICZ ELECTION (MAY 2, 1906).

The following appeal was lodged with the Fiscal in Nyitra : —

To the Royal Fiscus in Nyitra!

Sir!

The undersigned herewith hand in the following charge against Coloman Szabó, president of the Parliamentary Election of Szenicz, and base it on §§ 154, 158 and 169 of Law XV. of 1899, which C. Szabó violated in order to influence the election in favour of the candidate, Mr. Emödy.[1] Regarding the marshalling of the electors, he made the following dispositions: — As headquarters for Emödy's voters he selected the Arpád Square, where all roads meet, for Veselovsky's voters the square behind the hospital and churchyard. We raised no protest against this action, since we knew that it would have been in vain. The drawing of lots for these positions took place without our party being present, and it was confirmed by the Minister. Moreover, the President of the election promised not only to look out a good place for our party, but even to permit us entry into the inn of Stephen Holčik. When requested for the election passes, he replied that he would not give them on any account whatever. Not content with not keeping his promises on the polling day, he even ejected us from the square behind the hospital (in itself a bad enough position), on the pretext that brawls might arise between us and Emödy's supporters from Jablonic.

The electors from Čáčov Koválov Sojč, Sťepanov, Stráž, Smolinsk, Čárov and Šáštin, had to get out of their carriages a long way from the town and to reach their comrades by a roundabout way, escorted by gendarmes. . .  The rope which was drawn round the market place, was only removed at midday by order of the commandant, so that the electors from Rohov, Rovensko, Kunov and Koválov arrived too late. The military cordon was main­tained till 3 o'clock next day as far as the Janossy house, so that our voters could not even get to any of the inns. When the innkeeper Holčik was about to set up a beer barrel at the Slovak headquarters, he was forbidden by the military com­mandant, under pain of losing his license. At midnight the cordon was removed, except that which separated our voters from the polling booth and Holžik's inn. Passes were supplied solely to persons of the Emödy party, who did not permit our voters to pass through the cordon, and even hindered an officer from letting them through.

When Coloman Szabó and Alois Pfauser, the presidents of the second committee found that even then the polling was unfavourable to Emödy, they simply rejected 326 votes of our party, on which account our voters personally brought forward a charge of vio­lation of the Electoral Law. We also bring forward the charge of deprivation of the franchise, and request that these two matters be treated together. As witnesses : Dr. C. Horváth, advocate : C. Kresák, bank director: Martin Braxatoris, evang. pastor: Daniel Kopa, evang. teacher : Samuel Hatala, evang. teacher: and if necessary others also. We beg the Royal Fiscus to take up our charge.

(Signed) St. Fajnor, Dr. L. Simko.

The verdict of the Fiscus ran as follows : —

10466-906.

With regard to the above accusation and petition, in accordance with points 1 and 3, § 101, XXXIII. of 1896, I suspend the inquiry. The plaintiffs have the right to appeal to the Fiscus in Pressburg. Grounds.The accused deny having influenced the election in Emödy's favour, Coloman Szabó maintains regarding the place of assembly of the two parties, that he conferred with the repre­sentatives of Veselovsky's party, who then selected their own place. Regarding the assembling of the voters, the president prescribed their routes in the interests of both parties, i.e. routes where the opponents could not come into collision. The military cordons did not prevent any person from voting. That the voters from the above-mentioned villages arrived late at the poll and only voted towards the close, is explained by the fact that they had not yet reached the place of assembly. He does not believe that the military cordons roped off the way. Holčik's inn was only cut off from the voters till 10 o'clock, and then it became so crowded that even Veselovsky and Fajnor requested that the voters should be removed, in order to prevent general drunkenness. For this reason the inn was again cut off from the voters, although even then Veselovsky's electors had free access to the bar. No elector was illegally deprived of his vote, only those electors were declared unqualified to vote, whose identity could not be established, or who owing to drunkenness could not pronounce either their own name or that of the candidates. The testimony of the witnesses cannot be considered, since they all belong to the Veselovsky party and further make statements the truth of which they could not know under the cir­cumstances, and which are not even contained in the accusation. But even if their testimony were recognized as authentic, they could not prove the guilt of the accused on the basis of § 154, XV., 1899, since the accused justified themselves according to these sections ; for the party headquarters were by agreement between the representa­tives of each party situated at equal distances from the polling booth. Cards of legitimation were supplied to neither party, and regarding Holčik's inn, the latter supports the accusation. For the rest, it cannot be proved that the accused influenced the election in favour of Emödy. On the ground of inadequate proof, the inquiry is suspended.

nyitra, December 31, 1906.

CSERNANSZKY.

On appeal to the Fiscus of Pressburg, the following decision was obtained.

S. 11/1907.

I hereby confirm the verdict of the Royal Fiscus in Nyitra, which I have carefully read through, with the remark that I per­sonally inquired into the matter of the other allegations.

stephen kral.

 

THE ELECTION IN SZENICZ

B. Statistics of illegally annulled votes (compiled by J. Kresák, manager of the branch office of the "Tátra" Bank in Szenicz, and Drs. Horvát and Fajnor, advocates in Szenicz.

 

Commune.

Electors who are said to have pro­nounced, the candidate's name wrongly.

Electors whose names were missing from the roll.

Electors whose age did not agree with that given on the roll.

Electors "whose identity could not be estab­lished."

Number of rejected electors.

Of these, the charge was withdrawn by

Osusko

1

 —  

10

 —  

11

7

Chropov .

3

 —  

7

2

12

11

Oresko

2

1

1

 —  

4

3

Malý Kovalovec

5

 —  

 —  

 —  

5

5

Lopašov

1

 —  

2

1

4

4

Rohov

2

 —  

 —  

 —  

2

1

Častko

 —  

4

5

 —  

9

4

Šandorf

 —  

6

 

 —  

6

3

Turó-Luka

 —  

56

 —  

 —  

56

 —  

Sobotišt

9

7

2

6

24

 —  

Hradišt

 —  

5

 —  

 —  

5

1

Rovensko

4

2

4

 —  

10

 —  

Štepanov

1

 —  

6

 —  

7

3

Smrdaky

 —  

2

 —  

 —  

2

2

Smolinsko

 —  

 —  

14

2

16

16

Rybek

 —  

4

 —  

1

5

 —  

Lieskove

 —  

1

 —  

2

3

 —  

Velký Kovalov

14

 —  

 —  

 —  

14

14

Podbranč

10

1

 —  

1

12

12

Kunov

2

 —  

 —  

 —  

2

 —  

Hluboké . . .

3

1

 —  

1

5

 —  

 

57  

90

51

16

214

86

 

 

 

Voters on the Roll.

Voted for

Votes

polled.

Votes rejected.

 

 

Veselovsky.

Emödy.

 

Slovak.

Magyar.

Total

2,391

757

898

1, 655

326

0


 


[1] These passes enable the marshals of each party to circulate freely through the cordons of troops and gendarmes.