HUNGARY AND REACTION . .
(To THE EDITOR OV SPROIATOR." J
Stu,—In your issue of August 17th Count M. J. Esterhazy takes me once more to task for my remarks on the reaction now rampant in Hungary, and after skilfully drawing a few
red-herrings across the track, announces his intention not "to enter into any further discussion of the question." I think he is wise in adopting this policy, and I am encouraged to follow his example by the fact that he entirely evades the most damaging charges of my letter,—namely, those referring to political persecution of the nationalities, to interference with Press freedom, and to the absence of the right of assembly and association. There are only two points to which I feel bound to reply. (1) The contemptible insinuation of the Nepszava to which your correspondent refers only serves to emphasise the suspicion with which political adversaries regard each other in Hungary. I have myself more than once met Magyars of good standing who believed that our journalists had been bribed by the Ballplatz, on no other evidence than that they condemned the Kossuthist policy ! Needless to say, I hold no brief for the Social Democrats of Hungary ; I merely pointed out the absurdity of a traditional Government legislating for the working classes when the latter are entirely unrepresented in Parliament. (2) Count Ester- hizy states that Mr. Justb, the Speaker, denies having used the phrase about reaction which I attributed to him. I accept this assurance with regret, since it tends to lessen my admira- tion for that distinguished politician. My mistake lay in relying upon an article of the Pester Lloyd, .which gave prominence to the remark in question, and which was never contradicted p.t the time. While thanking Count Esterhizy for his good wishes for my winter's work, I would recommend him to try to improve the imperfections of his own language,
instead of saddling me with so unwelcome a task.—I am, Sir,
Previous page
