The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1915-05-25

 pense of keeping them down In fg11sF- aT1oes or whether they should aim to keep their Gods given gifts and strive for self-developnent and culture The SIovakS do not intend to gtve up their national character T91ey live in a, compact district n masses where Slo- walk, the only language they know, is. spoken. They exist not because of any favoFs or tolerance on the part of the Ful1ng class, rather than live Tn spite or the drastic measures to suppress 1 them the reason of which is their nat 1ral way of compact living and their inherent tenacfty brougfl out by per secutions.
 It was further stated every Slovak over there enjoys the same freedom l rdan.'' Those who talk of personal freedom In. Hungary either do not know their. subject are guilty of wilfuI ndsrep representation.
 It is merely ridiculous to talk of liberty in a country where societies, unions and clubs public or private have to get Governmental sanction and are dissolved at any moment; where the Minister of interior can dissolve 9 political party to para.Iyze all opposition against the ruling class; where boys are expelled from schools for talking their mother tongue, in the streets; where political. offenders are detained for months untried in l prison.
 We do not think there is a true of temperancei movement if it was for public good, especially among those liable to abuse And yet listen! In November 1874 the ruling class inn posed its veto upon the Siovak tenn perance leagues. The so-called 'F2o- sary'' society founded in imitation of Father Mathews institutions, secured within a. few weeks over forty thou, | and members. The Redemptorist Fathers furthering this movement, were ordered to withdraw. The tav- ern keepers complain that they can not pay rent to the country magnates, whose inf1huence was paramount in high quarters. The principal reason was to keep the Slovaks in ignorance and poverty by drink encouraged by 1nagnates., We can cite hundreds of facts to illustrate the above state presumption on the kindness of the ] good Editor. I Liberty for S1ovaks in Hungary! What a trayesty of the very word! Father John Popovfci, in April sos was sentenced to eight days in prison and 200 crowns. fine because he allowed the little acolytes to be dec orated with national coIors. Sept 1901, Dr. Markovic, as candidate flor the S1ovaka national party. held | reductiOn of taxes, gave his opinion against civil marriage, spoke in favor 1 of SIoyak schools and criticised the ! non-exe cution of the Law of Nation a1ities. He was arrested as tinstt- l gating against the order waiting six teen months for his trial. The prin- cipaI witness testifytng his 'sinstiga- ! ton" was Baranesik, man who had been formerly sentenced by the same court for seven months Imprisonment for a burglary. The defense claimed that a convicted criminal, according l to criminal code section 222, could not be heard on oath. But the Judge
 ordered the oath to be administered | to BarancstIx. because, though once
 a. criminal, he had sattoned by his pa
 triotic opinions, and because his evil I dence in this case had proved him I to be an honorable Hungar1an.''
 I The process of reasoning followed I by the judge may be summed up. "A 1 Panslay (Slovak1 always lies, pa l triotic Hungarian never lies; there fore the accused is guilty Dr. Mar kovic therefore was sentenced to two months in prison and three thousand l crowns fine (See page BPS Problems
 of Hungary'O Any mild expression
 of ones opinion is ''instigation'' against the ruling element.
 l November 1906 Father Juriga, a
 SIovaK member of Parliament. was sentenced to two years in prison and twelve hundred crowns dnes for writ l ing newspaper articles and therefore
 ''instigattng.''
 l Dec. 1906 Rev. HIfnka was sentenc- I ed for two years and fine of fifteen hundred crowns for the same offense. On, July 1907, three Bohemian tou- rists were arrested in Lucky because they were gathering facts about Hun garization of Slovak schools. One 1 of them kept in prison for three weeks I inv fiorpf inYl 7al7 7xy he l Minister at Vienna intervened- -
 We can go on with facts, old and tnew. to make up a massive.vo1ume.
 Especially the history of ballot and l teresting to know, as these show that 1 liberty there is myth for all but the ruling element and their follow CTS. The biased statistics of Hungary show 51 per cent Hungarians and 49
 per cent of nationaIities- Granting they are true. At the election in 1910,
 Hungarians elected 433 representa- tfves; the. other 48 per cent nation alities were able to elect but nine representatives This is due to the
 manner and freedom unique in Hun 1 gary. E(See: Count Apponyi, Cleve- land 19111
 A summary of political trials for the last few years shows that 93s non Hungarians, mostly for 'finstigation'' were sentenced, to 2S2 years. six months and two days. and fined .148,- 232 crowns Of these in 1S96-1 sos five hundred and sixty were Slovaks, among them clergymen, doctors, law yers and peasants, and many wom- en sentenced to ninety one years. seven months, and twenty six days and fined. 42,121 crowns, simply for 1 expressing their opinions on political Lor national problems Mind you, it does not mean expressing ones views as we Americans do. If SIovaks dar- led to criticise the administration as sharply as Americans sometimes do criticise their President, it would not | be a political but. a. criminal offence | in Hungary. In 19O5-190s fourteen Slovak news ] naners had. for not keeping their po-