THE JURIDICAL NATURE OF THE RELATIONS BETWEEN 



AUSTRIA AND HUNGARY 



BY COUNT ALBERT APPONYI 



[Count Albert Apponyi, Member of Hungarian House of Commons, b. Hun- 

 gary, 1846. Doctor of political and social science. Member of several literary 

 and scientific associations, and of The Hague Tribunal for International Arbi- 

 tration. Privy Councilor to His Majesty the King of Hungary. Author of 

 articles on public law and social science in Hungarian, German, French, and 

 English magazines.] 



I INTEND to put before you a brief account of the juridical nature 

 of our connection with Austria. In doing so I must apologize for 

 such defects in my address as will arise from the absence of those 

 scientific sources which I should have been glad to have consulted 

 even on a subject so familiar to me as this one is. When I left Europe 

 I had no idea of being honored by a call to address an audience of 

 American jurists. I am, therefore, totally unprovided with scientific 

 materials and must merely rely on my memory which, however, 

 will hardly fail me on this subject in anything essential. For more 

 than thirty years of parliamentary life it has been constantly in my 

 mind; on no other topic have I bestowed so much time and attention. 

 It is not my intention, however, to trouble you with my personal 

 opinion on any controversial matter; I mean to state nothing but 

 fact, law, and what is the common creed of all my countrymen 

 without distinction of party. 



The relations between Austria and Hungary seem to be such a 

 network of intricacies to foreign observers that very few of them 

 care to get to the bottom of the matter. In fact, the great difficulty 

 which is experienced in mastering this problem arises not so much 

 from its own nature as from the prevalence of certain false general 

 notions and misleading comparisons. The most widespread funda- 

 mental error, he Hpcoroi' i//ev8o9 as I shoul d like to call it, consists 

 in considering an Austrian Empire, which is understood to contain 

 Hungary, as the primordial fact, and whatever is known of Hunga- 

 rian independence as a sort of provincial autonomy conceded to 

 that " turbulent province " by the central power of the Empire. 

 Austrian court politicians and some German writers have done their 

 best --or rather their worst --to propagate this theory, which, 

 however, is radically false, and being almost daily contradicted by 

 facts, engenders hopeless confusion in the minds of all who choose to 

 be guided by it. The truth is the exact counterpart of the above- 

 quoted proposition; in truth, historical, legal, and material, the 

 primordial fact is an independent Kingdom of Hungary, which has 



