discussion must now be closed. It is, however, plain that you may spell the word Czech or Czechoslovak in any way you please, and it will still be difficult for the Americans to pronounce and even to remember.
One point which has not been sufficiently brought out in the discussion is the distinction between the designation of the race and of the country. The term Czechoslovak properly designates a people composed of two branches, the Czechs and the Slovaks. During the war the Czechoslovaks conducted a revolution against the Hapsburgs, organized their own Czechoslovak Army and followed the leadership of the Czechoslovak National Council. Their efforts resulted in the creation of a new state, the people of which are overwhelmingly of the Czechoslovak race, but which includes minorities of other races. It appears certain at this time that the Uhro-Rusins will form an autonomous part of the republic, and there will be a great many Germans and Magyars as well. It is desirable to have two terms for two distinct concepts—race and political citizenship. And the two terms are at hand: Czechoslovak to represent the race and Bohemia to represent the citizenship. It would be simply absurd to speak of a Rusin Czechoslovak or a German Czechoslovak, when referring to a Rusin from Marmoros-Sziget or a German from Northern Bohemia. But it will be perfectly proper to speak of a Rusin Bohemian or a German Bohemian, as one speaks of German Swiss or Walloon Belgian. Thus we would have Bohemia, not Czechoslovak Republic, the United States Government would send a minister to Bohemia and the Legation in Washington would be known as the Bohemian Legation.
If the proper distinction between Czechoslovak and Bohemian were merely a question of exactness and logic, it would not be worth while to press it; time would take care of it. But here in America for instance it has considerable practical significance. People simply will not accept the odd looking word Czechoslovak as permanent. When Col. V. S. Hurban testified before the Senate Committee investigating the Russian situation, he was asked by Senator Nelson the name of his country. According to newspaper accounts, Col. Hurban stated that the name had not been definitely decided upon, but that the country would be composed of four parts which he proceeded to name—Bohemia, Moravia, Silesia and Slovakia.
“But what do you call your country in your own language?” demanded Senator Nelson; “You call it Bohemia, do you not?” another interpolated.
“We do not like that name; you think it is Gypsy”, said Col. Hurban.
“But what”, returned Senator Nelson, “do you call it in your own language? We call it Bohemia, and the Germans have another name, and you have still another name, haven’t you?”
Col. Hurban gave the Czech name for Bohemia (which by the way the newspaper reporter did not trust himself to set down.)
This illustrates the drawbacks connected with the use of the term Czechoslovak. Of a similar nature is the problem what term to use on goods manufactured in the new republic. The law of this country provides that merchandise must be marked so as to show the country of origin. Shall we try to make popular the phrase “Made in Czechoslovakia” or would it not be easier to get American people accustomed to the slogan “Made in Bohemia?”
The editor believes that the word Czechoslovak should be used of race only and the word Bohemia should be applied to the country and the political status of its citizens.
How Many of Us Are There?
From the Československý Denník.
How many are there? That is one of the riddles which interested the world a great deal when the Bolshevik wireless sent out the first news of our appearance. At the beginning of June comrade Podvojsky wired to the Soviet of the Peoples Commissaries in Moscow: “Tomorrow I will smash the Czechoslovak hands, but within a few days later Podvojsky was removed, cities occupied by Czechoslovaks grew in numbers, thousands of miles of railroad came into Czechoslovak hands and Czechoslovaks increased in Russia far more rapidly than mushrooms after rain.
Everyone, friends and enemies, asked: “How many of them are there?” It was impossible to answer the question. I knew how many of us there were, when we left the Ukraine, I knew that a number of trains were filled at Penza with new volunteers, I knew that others waited to join us in Omsk, that another concentration point was at Novonikolajevsk, but I did not know how many there were of us all together. When people asked me I had to shrug my shoulders and look wise.
Of course the newspapers had to give some figures to their readers. One of the first papers which made a stab at it was Novaja Zizn which always wrote well of us and for that reason was later suppressed by the Bolsheviki. The editor knew positively that there were 201,007 Czechoslovak soldiers. I did not know the true number within thousands or perhaps tens of thousands, but the Novaja Zizn knew it exactly to the last man. Then other newspapers, burgeois and so
