RELATIONS BETWEEN AUSTRIA AND HUNGARY 543 



ministry; the latter is, therefore, co-responsible for the general 

 conduct of foreign and war affairs to the Hungarian parliament, 

 which may give an adverse vote on any question touching those 

 departments. Such a vote, though affecting directly the Hungarian 

 ministry only, would most certainly have an indirect bearing on 

 the position of the respective common minister, or on his policy. 

 This indirect influence of our parliament puts it into still clearer 

 evidence how the common affairs and the common executive agents 

 are anything rather than representatives of a power higher than the 

 public powers of Hungary; they are, on the contrary, constantly 

 controlled by these powers and, as we shall see more clearly still, 

 entirely dependent on them. 



Several other enactments of the Law XII, 1867, which express 

 the advisability for Austria and Hungary to agree on some matters 

 not exactly belonging to the sphere^of mutual defense, 1 I pass by 

 here, because, being entirely facultative in their execution, they 

 can have no possible bearing on the juridical aspects of national 

 independence. But it is now my task to analyze the institutions 

 created in 1867, and to inquire whether they have impaired Hun- 

 gary's independence as a sovereign nation, the maintenance of which 

 we have followed out up to that memorable date. 



That there is mutual dependence, in the political sense of the word, 

 between two nations which are bound to act together in certain affairs 

 and have created institutions to secure such identity of action, seems 

 perfectly clear. Mutual dependence of this kind certainly exists 

 between Hungary and Austria; we have a strong party in Hungary 

 which objects even to this, and calls itself, on that account, the party 

 of independence. But with this political aspect of the question I 

 have here nothing to do. Mutual dependence between two equals 

 depending on the free will of both does not affect their independent 

 juridical individuality, in the case of a nation this nation's sov- 

 ereignty. That would be impaired only should the nation be incor- 

 porated as a part into some larger body, or controlled by some legal 

 power superior to her own public powers. Now, is this the case of 

 Hungary since 1867? 



The question put in these terms is negatived by the very nature 

 of the transaction which we are examining. We call it a compro- 

 mise and such it is politically speaking. Hungary, before creating 

 the Law XII, 1867, ascertained in a proper way that it would 

 settle the difficulties pending with the dynasty and with Austria, 



1 The most important of these enactments is one which provides for customary 

 union to he periodically established. It is far from improbable that in a few 

 years that union will be dissolved and a commercial barrier rise between Hungary 

 and Austria. Xor will this modification of their economic relation juridically 

 affect the connection as established by the Pragmatic Sanction and shaped out 

 by the law of 1867. 



