Servia's Claims Absurd, Says Konta.

New York Times 100 years ago today, January 8, 1913:
Should Understand That She Is Too Young a Power to Stand Alone.
AUSTRIA NOT TYRANNICAL
Banker Points to Her Liberal Treatment of Serbs Within Her Boundaries.
To the Editor of The New York Times:
    An article on the "Servian Question" in your issue of Jan. 5, by Prof. M. I. Pupin of Columbia University, challenges my reply. It is a question of facts, and to them I will confine myself, contenting myself for the rest with the assurance to Prof. Pupin's readers that I am not, never have been, and never shall be "Austria-Hungary's mouthpiece." In justice to myself, and for the information of the American public, I will add, however, that "Austrian agent" and similar terms are the habitual answers of all Servians to whoever disagrees with them on political matters. Through much free use they have lost all further significance to those who know.
    Now for the facts. Prof. Pupin mixes up, in his first charge, three different trials — the Agram high treason trial, the suit for slander brought against Dr. Heinrich Friedjung of the Neue Freie Presse of Vienna by three Croatian Deputies, and the trial, at Belgrade, of one Vasitch for self-confessed forgery of documents involving the Servian Government in a conspiracy against Austro-Hungarian rule over her Serb subjects.
    The three trials were closely connected, and originated in the publication of a pamphlet, "Finale," by Georg Nastitch, in which this individual claimed to expose a vast conspiracy for pan-Servian emancipation by revolution, to put it comprehensively. He further asserted that, disgusted with the tactics of the party, especially with its plot to kill King Nicholas of Montenegro, the other Slav leader, he left the movement, whose headquarters were in Belgrade. According to the Servians, Nastitch was an "Austrian agent," of course, but it is a fact that among the documents he published there were some of unquestionable authenticity. Another individual, one Vasitch, a young Belgrade journalist, sold to an attaché of the staff of Baron Korgach, Austro-Hungarian Minister at Belgrade, documents to the same effect, claimed to have been stolen from the Servian Foreign Office. Prof. Pupin, who does not stand alone in this opinion, holds that Forgach himself actually instigated forgeries, with the passive connivance of Aehrenthal, who, so the story runs, used them knowingly in order to convince the Emperor and the heir apparent of the need of the immediate annexation of Bosnia-Herzegovina on account of maturing concerted plans in Croatia and Servia.
    The matter became so mixed up that it remains for the future historian to untangle it. Only partisan views of it are possible at present. Prof. Masaryk of Prague, Czech member of the Austrian Parliament and of the Austro-Hungarian delegation, interpellated Count Aehrenthal on the subject and demanded the production of the forged documents. The Foreign Minister denied their existence, and, furthermore, defended the honor and good faith of Baron Forgach, who, be it added, remained in good standing at Belgrade through it all. One has the choice between the unlikely theory of Aehrenthal's need of such methods to carry out his plans and the more plausible one of the deception of an attaché of legation in Belgrade, accepted without deep questioning at Vienna. The high treason trials at Agram, resulting from this affair, took place before Croatian judges. The forty accused Croatians were kept in confinement for two years, because the offense of which they were accused is not one admitting of bail. They were condemned to short terms of imprisonment, which were immediately remitted by the Emperor. Vasitch was condemned to five years' imprisonment.
    As to Servia's "historical claims" to Durazzo, it may be as well to point out that "historical claims" in the Near East are confused, confusing, and unreliable. Venice held that port during more than half of the thirteenth century; Servia possessed it for a few years longer than that in the fourteenth; Venice held it thereafter once more for nearly 200 years, when the Turks took it. Therefore the Servian "historical claim" is not overwhelmingly strong. It is the same with Ragusa, the home of the renascence of Serb literature. It was part of the domain of Venice from 1205 to 1358, from which year to 1526 it was a dependency of Hungary. Belgrade itself has been held successively by Greeks, Bulgarians, Hungarians, Austrians, and Turks. Indeed, "historic claims" in the Balkans are strangely confusing. As for the Serb literary renascence at Ragusa, that was the work of Western — that is, of Roman Catholic, not Greek Orthodox Serbs; in other words, of Serbs who had absorbed the civilization of the West.
    Oh, yes, the gousiars! I almost forget them. The Southern Slavs, since their emancipation from the Turkish yoke, have interpreted the message of these Westernized singers of theirs, so Prof. Pupin says, as "meaning perfect religious and political freedom for all." In burned, ruined, blood-drenched Macedonia, for instance? In the horrors of that night of the capture of Salonika, perhaps? On the march through Albania, no doubt? The shocking mutilation of the corpse of Queen Draga may have been still another proof of the triumph of their teachings? And why did the Turkish Jews in this country, and the far more numerous Jews of different nationalities, now resident here, but at some time or other living in Turkey, unanimously express their hope for Turkish victory at the beginning of this war for the sake of their coreligionists in the Balkans? Since Prof, Pupin inquires, I will tell him that the Jews of Austria and Hungary are quite comfortable and contented with their lot, thank you.
    And now Bosnia-Herzegovina — unhappy, downtrodden country! All foreign authorities agree upon the fruitful work done there by Austria-Hungary, but they may be all mistaken. The agrarian problem has not been solved in that unfortunate country, according to Prof. Pupin. The answer is that it is being solved by the agrarian banks established by the Government. As for the oppression of the Serbs there by Austria, the majority of the civil officials are Austrian Slavs, appointed on account of their better understanding of the population than Austro-Hungarians could bring to their task. There are public primary schools, and the four denominations — Orthodox, Catholic, Moslem, and Jew — have perfect liberty to conduct educational establishments of their own under their own clergymen. Institutions for the higher education of youth have been established, and if the country has not progressed educationally so fast as it could, it is on account of the jealousies of the four religions among themselves.
    "Security for Government officials?" Oh, no, security for Christian and Moslem and Jew, the kind of security that Macedonia might have had these many years if it had been blessed with a Government like that of the annexed provinces. And as for illiteracy, according to the latest edition of "Encyclopaedia Britannica," only 17 per cent. of the population of the Kingdom of Servia could read and write in the year 1910. According to all accessible authorities the proportion of Bosnia-Herzegovina is more than 50 per cent.
    I had intended not to "drag in Russia" again, in Prof. Pupin's words, but find myself forced to do so in the end. The Southern Austrian Slavs, according to him, know that the Serbs of Servia and Montenegro are the natural leaders of "this movement," What movement? The Panslavism that is "an intellectual union and co-operation," no doubt. The other, the "militant" movement, we know now, is an Austro-Hungarian forgery.
    The fundamental error of Servia is her sudden belief that she can stand alone, that she has become a "power" after a brief war that has completely exhausted her and her far wiser allies, notwithstanding the utter unpreparedness of their enemy. It is this that constitutes the "swelled head" of Belgrade.
    It will take the Balkan nationalities a generation to recover from their efforts in numbers of men and in material resources. They need peace, long peace. The way to it has been pointed out by Bulgaria. It leads to the West, to closer relations with its civilization. Servia will find these relations through the full economic rights Austria-Hungary has offered her at Durazzo. A premature attempt to stand alone on the part of the Balkan monarchies will but lead to renewed intrigues in their peninsula, to further wars and alarums of wars on a gigantic scale. These nationalities should remember that they have serious international duties now as well as national rights.
    Prof. Pupin's reference to Hungary as a "province of Austria" is, no doubt, a slip of the pen.
            ALEXANDER KONTA.
            New York, Jan. 6, 1913.