The secession of Baron Banffy has done much to discredit
the Coalition in the eyes of the Hungarian people. That organisation now appears as a rudderless ship with its crew at cross-purposes, and the electors may well ask why such a crisis has been created if the agitators were not sure of their policy. There has been a flood-tide of explanation and declaration. M. Kossuth has stated that the policy of the Coalition is the maintenance of the 1867 Agreement, and he welcomes the loss of Baron Banffy as the party's gain. M. Rakovsky, the Vice-President of the late Chamber, has issued a• manifesto declaring that while he adheres to the Coalition, he regards its demands on the military question as mistaken. Count Albert Apponyi is left as the only 'upholder of these demands, and in an inflammatory address he insists that the liberties of Hungary are at stake, and that any secession, however minute, is a betrayal of the people. Mean- while, Count Tisza has issued a most damaging criticism of Coalition tactics, urging that the only hope for Hungary is a frank return to the dualist traditions of Francis Deltic. It is a whimsical situation, for Constitutional government has been virtually superseded because of the refusal of the Coalition to yield on certain points which all the leaders, with one excep- tion, declare that they have given up.
