# America in the Struggle for Czechoslovak Independence/The Czechoslovak Question in Congress

III
THE CZECHOSLOVAK QUESTION IN CONGRESS
While foreign relations even in the United States are entrusted to the Executive, subject to consent to treaties by the Senate, the influence of Congress cannot of course be overlooked by anyone seeking to create a favorable atmosphere, in America, to a foreign cause, or involving any steps within the sphere of foreign policy. Rather early in the war, still during the period of American neutrality, an opportunity was afforded to present the Czechoslovak cause to the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives.
On December 6, 1915, Representative Meyer London, of New York, introduced in the House of Representatives a joint resolution, calling upon the President of the United States to offer mediation to the belligerents in Europe, and declaring it to be the judgment of the Senate and the House of Representatives of the United States that a durable peace could be established if certain ​principles enumerated in the resolution should be made the basis of discussion in a congress of neutral nations. One of the principles so specified was the liberation of oppressed nationalities.
Hearings were had before the committee on February 24–25, 1916, at Washington, and the Bohemian National Alliance was there represented by a delegation of three of its officials, one of whom obtained the floor and presented the Czech claims in a short address prepared by himself, but which, though it was left in its original form, was the subject of much careful deliberation on the part of the officials of the Alliance before the delegation left for Washington and was, therefore, thoroughly representative of the attitude of Czech leaders in America.
The address, as well as the interesting exchange of views between the speaker and members of the committee, appears in the printed proceedings of the latter, and the exposé itself was published in pamphlet form by the Bohemian National Alliance of America under the title Bohemia’s Claim to Independence. The speaker found it possible to plant himself on precedents from American his tory. Paraphrasing the peroration from a famous oration of Daniel Webster welcoming Kossuth, this exposition of the Czech cause ends with the ​question: “Why not Bohemian independence; Bohemian control of her own destinies, and Bohemia as a distinct nationality among the nations of Europe?”
It is worth noting that, with the exception of the legislature of the state of Texas, which invited a Czech spokesman to address a joint session of the Senate and the House in May, 1917, and was so addressed by him, the Foreign Committee of the United States House of Representatives was the only parliamentary body in the world which heard, during the war, an exposition of the cause of oppressed nationalities, Czechoslovaks among them. Of course, this was possible only as a result of the American system which permits, and frequently invites, expressions of opinion by interested parties, or exponents of principles and causes; certainly a method which can do no harm and often probably results in much benefit, and at least gives the public a hearing before legislation is definitely formulated and adopted.
While registering the appearance of Czech spokesmen before parliamentary bodies during the war, it may not be amiss to remark parenthetically that following the Armistice the Czechoslovak commissioner in the United States addressed the legislatures of Nebraska and Massa​chusetts and the Senate of the Iowa assembly. In the United States Senate the Czechoslovak problem makes its first appearance on May 25, 1917, when Senator, now Judge, W. S. Kenyon introduced a resolution reciting the age-long oppression of the Czech nation by the Hapsburgs and declaring it the sense of the Senate that Bohemia should again become an independent state and that at the future Peace Conference the United States insist upon Czechoslovak independence as a part of any really democratic settlement making for permanent peace.
Of course, Senator Kenyon’s resolution never came to a vote, yet to the Czechoslovaks it had obvious value, reaching, as it did, every member of the Senate and having been reported by the Associated Press. Also, it was noticed in diplomatic circles, as was ascertained by Dr. M. R. Stefanik, Vice-President of the Czechoslovak National Council and later General in the French Army and first Czechoslovak Minister of War.
A year later, May 31 , 1918, Senator W. H. King, of Utah, introduced another resolution, similar to the one presented before him by Senator Kenyon, dealing with the Czechoslovak problem in the same way and also pledging America to the Czechoslovak cause.
​Both Senators—Kenyon as well as King—were actuated by a genuine conviction of the justice of the Czechoslovak demands and were not in the least influenced by ordinary political considerations. Judge Kenyon is a Republican and the Czech vote in this country is almost unanimously Democratic, and as for Utah, Senator King’s state, it is to be doubted whether in that commonwealth there is the proverbial baker’s dozen voters of Czech or Slovak origin.
The Slav Press Bureau was a political center and a journalistic office, and also the distributing point for virtually all Czechoslovak literature. Naturally, copies of all publications were sent to Senators and Congressmen. Also, there was kept at the Bureau a diary, by all odds the most important source-material for Czechoslovak war activities in this country.
Technical reasons—lack of Czech stenographers in America—determined the writing of this diary in the English language, undoubtedly a handicap to the Czech historian, but an advantage to the American writer who may desire to study the movement. The diary indicates that the response in Congress was not perfunctory merely and that in both Houses there was a growing and genuine interest. ​A few of the entries will sufficiently substantiate the statement. The following should suffice:
Individual letters are being written to all senators and representatives relative to Capek’s book, The Slovaks of Hungary, and this work is being sent to all senators for the purpose of informing them correctly with regard to the Slovak question.―June 15, 1917.
Among the matters disposed of today were letters to Senators Kenyon and Williams calling their attention to the Magyar agitation. To both senators there were sent The Heart of Europe with autograph signatures of the author, and Mr. Capek’s work, The Slovaks of Hungary. This propaganda is being carried out with a view to influencing the senators in regard to the Slovak phase of the Bohemian question.—June 18, 1917.
A particularly important letter came in from Senaator W. S. Kenyon. The senator says that he hopes to speak on the Bohemian question in the near future and requests literature and suggestions. Therefore, the following literature was sent to him: 1. A copy of the Declaration of the Bohemian Foreign Committee. 2. A copy of Austrian Terrorism in Bohemia. 3. The Slavs Among the Nations. 4. A Program for Peace. 5. A memorial to the international by the Bohemian branch of the American Socialist Party. 6. An excerpt from this week’s Literary Digest. 7. Copies of New Europe beginning with No. 21 and ending with No. 33, inclusive. His attention was also ​called to Mr. Pergler’s April address before the American Academy of Political and Social Science and his address at Long Beach before the Conference on Foreign Relations.—June 23, 1917.
Numerous letters are coming in from various senators acknowledging receipt of literature. Among these today were letters from Senators Sutherland, Dillingham, Stone, Jones, and Watson. A particularly friendly letter was received from Senator John Sharp Williams, addressed to Mr. Pergler.—June 23, 1917.
John Sharp Williams, it should be emphasized at least en passant, was one of the members of the United States Senate who from the very beginning understood the nature of the Austro-Hungarian problem, and at the April, 1917, meeting of the American Academy of Political and Social Science delivered an address in which he advocated Czechoslovak independence.
But to continue our illustrations:
Letters are still continuing to come in acknowledging receipt of The Heart of Europe and Slovaks of Hungary. Among those today were letters from Senators Martin, New, Jones, Hitchcock, Wadsworth, Thomas, Simmons, Norris, Hale, Penrose, Dillingham, Lodge, Nelson, LaFollette, Pomerene, and Smoot. Also Senators Sheppard, Warren, Vardaman.—June 25, 1917.
Letters from senators are continuing to come in ​acknowledging receipt of literature. Especially important is the letter from Senator New, of Indiana, who says he is in favor of the Kenyon resolution and will vote for it.—June 26, 1917.
Letters from United States Senators, acknowledging the receipt of literature, are still continuing to come in. Today there were letters from Senators Walsh, Chamberlain, H. W. Johnson, Cummins, Culberson, and E. S. Johnson, who says he will vote for the Kenyon resolution when it comes up in the Senate.—June 27, 1917.
The diary shows other communications of a similar nature, but no useful purpose would be served in setting out others than those given above.
When finally it became evident that the American Government could not avoid declaring war also upon Austria-Hungary, the Czechs and Slovaks resident in this country and still unnaturalized stood in danger of being dealt with as alien enemies, a situation paradoxical enough, but for those concerned very disagreeable. It became necessary to call the attention of competent factors to this abnormal condition, and members of the House and the Senate were also immediately notified. Thus the Czech and Slovak organizations in New York (Bohemian National Alliance, Slovak League and Alliance of Czech ​Catholics) immediately addressed a communication to members of Congress from that state, dated November 28, 1917, and which, perhaps, is not without interest. It reads:
The possibility of a necessity of declaring war against Austria-Hungary and the fact that Congress may consider it wise to declare such war at the present session, and the fact that it is necessary to adopt strict methods against alien enemies, constrains us to call your attention to a situation that would seem to make advisable special measures regarding those residents of America who are technically enemies, but in fact are pro-Ally, such as the Czechoslovaks.
Legally speaking the Czechs and Slovaks are Austro-Hungarians, but as a matter of fact they are antagonistic to Austria-Hungary and Germany, as is evidenced by the fact that there is a Czech army fighting the Austro-Hungarian and German forces in Russia, and another Czechoslovak army is being formed in France. Throughout the world there is a well-defined movement for Bohemian independence and against Austria-Hungary and Germany.
It is worth saying that a strong case could be made out for the legal theory that Bohemians are simply subjects of the Bohemian state; that no Bohemian parliamentary body has ever authorized a declaration of war, and that on this ground no Czech can be classed as an alien enemy. But whatever the situation may be technically, it remains a fact that Czechs and Slovaks are ardent supporters of the ​Allied cause. It is also a fact that they are as loyal an element of the American population as can be pointed out.
Most of the Czechs and Slovaks, whenever they could, have become American citizens. However, there will naturally be some who could not become naturalized here, and perhaps there may be some cases of neglect. But it seems that as a general proposition Czechs and Slovaks should not be classed as alien enemies and subjected to measures adopted against alien enemies, because, in the first place, this might result in a serious injustice to loyal people, and, in the second place, because most of them are skilled workers, and all those who are here should be used, especially in industries needed for a vigorous prosecution of the war, such as munition factories, etc. Unless the situation is handled carefully, a disorganization of industry is not impossible, with serious results.
We hope that at the proper time you will kindly bear these facts in mind. It may be said that in France Czechs and Slovaks are not considered as alien enemies. The French government looks upon the Czechoslovaks as a friendly nation. The Czechoslovak National Council, with headquarters in France, which we recognize as the supreme Czechoslovak body, has issued cards in the nature of passports which, upon being produced anywhere in France, are recognized as evidence of the loyalty and reliability of the bearer, as well as of the fact that he is not an alien enemy in the real sense of the term.
​Perhaps the French experience may aid in solving this important problem.
At least on one occasion the Czechoslovak representatives were confronted by a rather delicate situation. President Wilson’s fourteen points appear in his address to Congress, January 8, 1918. Point ten maintains: “The peoples of Austria-Hungary, whose place among the nations we wish to see safeguarded and assured, should be accorded the freest opportunity of autonomous development.” But the Czechoslovaks were not willing to accept mere autonomy—they demanded independence! And Senator Owen, of Oklahoma, following Mr. Wilson’s address, introduced in the Senate a resolution endorsing the fourteen points. From the Czechoslovak point of view this would have made matters worse. But what to do and not antagonize the White House?
The representative of the Bohemian National Alliance called on Senator William Stone, then Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and brought the situation to his attention. The Senator at once understood that point ten to Czechoslovaks and other Austrian nationalities was unacceptable, but he also understood that a public and open attack upon this point, taking issue with the President, by any Czech, would be ​poor and undiplomatic tactics indeed. (Mr. Theodore Roosevelt did discuss the matter publicly, in the Washington Post, Kansas City Star, and other papers.) An executive and therefore confidential session of the committee was fixed for the following day, February 6, 1918, and at Senator Stone’s suggestion a letter was written to him, as chairman of the committee, which was laid by him before that body when it met. (See Appendix.) Whether or not knowledge of the letter ever reached Mr. Wilson is, of course, unknown, but the fact remains that the resolution was never acted upon.
The Czechoslovaks of America gave to the country of their birth not only money and time and political support of a highly important nature, but they also gave three thousand volunteers to the Czechoslovak forces in Europe, a very creditable number when it is considered that only those were recruited, for these forces, who were not subject to the draft. The question of the return of these men to the United States, particularly should the cause fail, presented a grave problem. In January, 1918, there was introduced in the House of Representatives a resolution (H. J. Res. 212), permitting the return to this country of men who had fought in the Allied armies. This ​gave an opportunity to present to the House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, at the invitation of the chairman, Mr. Burnett, of Alabama, now deceased, the plight of the Czechoslovak volunteers. Mr. Burnett, at the hearing in question, expressed a desire that the matter be also presented in writing, and this was done in a communication which , while fairly lengthy, is also descriptive of the Czechoslovak situation at the time, and will therefore bear reproducing here:
With reference to the joint resolution (H. J. Res. 212) concerning which you were so kind as to permit me to appear before your committee the other day, I wish to submit the following thoughts:
1. The resolution provides as follows:
“That notwithstanding the provisions of the immigration act of February 5th, nineteen hundred and seventeen, alien residents of the United States who have enlisted or been conscripted for the military service of the United States or of any one of the nations co-belligerents of the United States in the present war, who may apply for readmission to this country, after being honorably discharged or granted furlough abroad in connection with their enlistment or conscription, shall be readmitted.”
2. There is in existence in France a Czechoslovak (Bohemian) Army which is organized under the pro​visions of a decree of the French Government, and the first article of which decree is as follows:
“The Czechoslovaks, organizing an autonomous army and recognizing from the military point of view the superior authority of the French High Command, are waging war under their own standard against the Central Empire.”
The second article of the decree, which, recognizes the Czechoslovak National Council officially, says:
“The Czechoslovak National Army from a political point of view is under the direction of the National Council of the Czech and Slovak countries, whose main headquarters are in Paris.”
3. If, by reason of the fact that the Czechoslovak Army recognizes the superior authority of the French High Command from the military point of view, it can be said that the Czechoslovak volunteers from America enlisted for military service with the French Army, then the resolution covers their case. But there is certainly a good deal of doubt that such position could be taken, because politically the highest institution governing the army is the Czechoslovak National Council, and because the decree declares it to be an autonomous army. The mere fact that in the military sense it recognizes the superiority of the French High Command probably does not make it a part of the French Army, any more than the English Army would be a part of the army of France should a united command be accepted. Furthermore, as a general proposition it would seem that in these matters the political status is the determining one.
​4. As to the readmission of these Czechoslovak volunteers, a good deal would, of course, depend on the interpretation the immigration authorities would give to the resolution if it should remain in the present form. But our government as yet has not recognized the Czechoslovak nation as a belligerent, even if the French in effect has done so. Under international law the status of belligerency can hardly be said to exist even though there are Czechoslovak armies fighting against Austria and Germany in Russia, Italy, and France. But if a movement is to be accorded belligerent rights, international law seems to demand that the insurrectionary movement must not only have been participated in by a considerable portion of the population, as is the case with the Czechoslovaks even now, but also that the revolutionists must have proved their ability to maintain themselves in certain well-defined limits of territory, and must be established and must be prepared to maintain diplomatic intercourse with the states whose recognition is sought. (See Davis on International Law.) Owing to the peculiar situation in Austria, this second requirement as yet could not be fulfilled.
5. At any rate, there is so much doubt as to whether the resolution would cover the cases of the Czechoslovak volunteers who might be crippled and would desire to return to this country, that it would seem only fair and just that the resolution be so worded as to cover their case, assuming that this resolution passes. It is to be highly appreciated that you ​yourself remarked the other day that you see the justice of this position. And it is a just position.
6. The justice of this appears sufficiently from the fact that only those men go from America to France to join the Czechoslovak Army who are not subject to our own draft laws, and that they go to fight for our common cause as well. In some cases they leave their families, they sever ties of many years in order to offer up their lives for the cause of America and Bohemia, which is also the cause of humanity. If those can be readmitted who have joined the French, the Canadian and the other Allied armies, certainly the Czechoslovak volunteers can also be admitted on the same grounds, and even for more forceful reasons.
7. The situation is one that might present certain complications which perhaps it will be necessary to submit to the State Department, and indeed I am sending to the State Department a copy of this letter. Unfortunately, as yet our government has not given the Czechoslovak National Council the official recognition which has been accorded by the government of the French republic. I trust the time will come when this will be done. However, if our government as yet is not ready for this step, it still seems that the resolution can be so amended as to cover the cases of the Czechoslovak volunteers without according such official recognition. For instance, if following the word “war” in line nine of the resolution the words should be inserted “or who during the present war left the United States to fight against ​Germany, Austria-Hungary or Turkey,” the situation would be adequately met. This is merely a suggestion, and perhaps even a better wording could be found. I am writing this rather hastily so as to get the matter before you, and have not had time to suggest such formulations as, perhaps, may be definite, but probably the suggestion I make conveys sufficiently the idea I have in mind.
8. The Czechoslovak National Council is an organization headed by Professor T. G. Masaryk, a former member of the Austrian parliament, who escaped from Austria immediately after the outbreak of the war, and with the authority of the Bohemian parties, and backed by the whole Czechoslovak nation, is leading a movement for complete Czechoslovak independence from Austria.
The resolution in its original form was met by the argument that the Allied Powers can, and should, take care of their own soldiers, whether conscripted at home or coming from America. But of course this argument could not apply, and was not applied, to those who joined the Czechoslovak forces. So in the end Mr. Slayden, of Texas, introduced a resolution (H. J. Res. 255), on February 28, 1918, authorizing the readmission of “Aliens lawfully resident in the United States, who, prior to April sixth, nineteen hundred and seventeen, declared their intention of becoming citizens of the United States, and who have en ​listed for service with Czechoslovak, Polish, or other independent forces attached to the United States Army or to the army of any one of the co-belligerents of the United States in the present war,” who may apply for readmission within one year after the termination of the war.
The resolution was supported by a report, dated March 2, 1918, which speaks very highly of the Czechoslovak forces, and it also had the support of the Department of Labor in the form of a letter by the then Assistant Secretary, Louis F. Post.
The resolution became law after it obtained the signature of the President. The incident affords an interesting recognition, both legislative and executive, of revolutionary forces which as yet had not been recognized in the usual forms observed in international intercourse and international law. Just what effect under international law this sort of recognition might have had cannot be gone into here, but the international lawyer is afforded an interesting subject for speculation.
When Dr. Masaryk arrived in Washington he was welcomed at the Union Station of the capital by twenty-seven members of the House and Senate. A list of their names has been saved and they may, therefore, be registered here: Sabath, ​Hardy, Buchanan, Slayden, Lobeck, Mansfield, Hitchcock, Sloan, Stephens, Good, Kenyon, Medill, McCormick, McAndrews, Lewis, Igoe, Dyer, Hayes, Baker, Doremus, Pomerene, Wealty, Smith, Eagan, Cody, Burnett, Barnhart, Van Dyke.
Thereafter the Czechoslovak problem came up often enough. Thus, on October 16 , 1918, Representative Sabath delivered an address in which he embodied a whole anti-Austrian article, originally appearing in the Yale Review and reprinted in pamphlet form under the title of Should Austria-Hungary Exist? In the Senate, Henry Cabot Lodge declared openly for the dismemberment of Austria-Hungary and Czechoslovak independence.
The problem of Austria-Hungary ceased to be regarded as outside the sphere of American interests and Czechoslovaks were no more defending an unknown cause.