ings, the all-powerful influence of Papritz made itself felt at once. He was a lucky man who was not promptly sent away, for Mr. Papritz, who managed to keep away from the front, was able as a rule to have the good-natured guards ordered to join their depot and thence to the battlefields.
We, who spent a long time in the military prison of Vienna, can best appreciate the joke coupled with the name of Hindenburg. They say that when Hindenburg got all his orders and distinctions, he was asked whether he desired anything else. Yes, said Hindenburg, to be an Austrian sergeant. We know from our experience in the Vienna prison what Feldwebelwirtschaft (Sergeant regime) implies. Ordinances, recommendations, regulations, restrictions, even if they come from the ministry of war, have not a particle of validity. Adjunct Papritz does not permit this, or he requires that, and there you are. All that uncontrolled and arbitrary power of an adjunct has many times been experienced by me. In April I beseeched deputy Staněk to intervene for me with the commander of the prison, Lieutenant-Colonel Werner, against Papritz. The measure of his wrongs was full and over-flowing. The colonel was furious. He promised to put an end to different matters, but that same night he had a stroke of apoplexy and fell dead. Mr. Papritz’s rule went on. At the end of June I preferred charges against him in a most energetic manner. But the authorities apparently placed much more confidence in the protestations and gestures of Mr. Papritz.
An execrable name. It is written indelibly with pain into the records of Czech martyrdom in Vienna. Perhaps today, when the situation is different, Papritz would act differently; perhaps he may realize that it is a serious crime to outrage human dignity, which ought to survive the loss of liberty; perhaps he may realize that it would have been a noble thing to use his opportunity to do good even within the prison walls. But it is too late. What is past, cannot be changed. It is impossible to bring back to life those whom the regime of Papritz drove to suicide.
The arbitrariness of that person knew no limits. A prisoner needed clothing or underwear. Mr. Papritz simply refused to bother about it. Men of a good social position who had been roughly and without warning torn away from their families were obliged to wear the same shirt for weeks. It was the same with additions to the meager prison fare. Prisoners from Vienna got theirs. But whatever came by mail, Mr. Papritz sent resolutely back. The relatives bought at great cost some meat, pastry, tobacco. But the men who looked for the present with so much hope, who needed this food badly, because they were continually hungry, never received it. Most of the eatables sent back were spoiled. But what did a man like Papritz care about it? He made the Czech political prisoners feel his power. If repeated protests brought a certain reform of abuses, in a few days the old order of things was back in full force. Papritz delighted in misery. His name will always be pronounced with disgust by those who have lived in the military prison of Vienna. It is what it deserves.
Cyril Dušek, editor of the “Čas”, was seriously ill. It was difficult to get in prison the necessary medicines. His wife forwarded them therefore to the chief doctor of the prison, stating for whom they were intended. The doctor sent the medicines to our sick friend. Papritz had no business to concern himself in any way about this matter. Nevertheless he took it upon himself to send the medicines back. No appeal was possible. Mr. Papritz, a man without heart and without conscience, was the supreme authority for all the unfortunate men detained in the military prison of Vienna.
Current Topics.
COMMENT OF AMERICAN PERIODICALS.
The past month has been extremely encouraging to those who watch the newspapers of this country for expressions favorable to the aspirations of Bohemia. There is evident on the one side a growing appreciation of the Austro-Hungarian problem, of the fact that the fate of this medieval empire will be the measure of success of the Allies; and on the other hand there is more knowledge of Bohemia and consequently more sympathy with her claims.
The bold battle of the Czech deputies in the Vienna parliament and the riots in Bohemia have been the occasion for many a friendly editorial. To enumerate them all would not be easy. We can only mention the more significant discussions.
It is a sign of the growing influence of the Slav Press Bureau that the New York daily papers pay more attention both to Bohemia and to Bohemian propaganda in this country. The Brooklyn Eagle and the New York Evening Mail have described at considerable length and with much friendliness the work that is being done in New York for the recruiting of the Czechoslovak army and for the winning of America’s sympathies. The New York Journal of Commerce advocated editorially freedom for Bohemia.
The noted war writer, Frank H. Simonds, in an article entitled “Enslaving the Slav— Germany’s Ambition” which appeared in several important journals sets out the plans of Germany so as to make it plain that the best way to defeat them is to give the Austrian Slavs independence. Of more direct interest to the Bohemians is William Hard’s narrative of an imagined inter-Allied conference in London, published in the February Metropolitan; it contains a fine appreciation of the greatness of Masaryk, the man who is worshipped by every Czech and Slovak.
