local national governments. This would certainly have meant a Federal State within the framework of a new Austria. But his interpretation is not confirmed by the documents dated October 28. The text of the first Czechoslovak Statute and of the revolutionary manifesto differ from the Emperor’s manifesto. He demanded the territorial integrity of Hungary, whereas the first Statute and the manifesto of October 28 speak of the “Czechoslovak” State and of the provincial authorities, with evident reference to Slovakia. On the other hand, it is true that the Emperor’s manifesto mentions “Czechoslovaks.” But the Statute declares that the form of the State shall be settled by the National Assembly and by the Provisional Government in Paris. This is in contradiction with the Emperor’s manifesto which leaves no room for doubt that the form of our State was to be federal. (The first Statute and the revolutionary manifesto approximated more nearly to Dr. Lammasch’s programme.) And, in the preamble to the Statute, the Czechoslovak State is declared to be independent. Juridical independence is not a precise concept, yet it is in opposition to the absolute vagueness of the constitutional programme contained in the Emperor’s manifesto. There may be a difference between the wording of the Statute and of the revolutionary manifesto, and what the National Committee may have said, for tactical reasons, to Count Coudenhove. On this point we must await an authentic report. Meanwhile it may be admitted that the wording of the Statute and of the manifesto is indefinite. In the preamble to the Statute the National Committee describes itself as the executive organ of State sovereignty, but its first clause restricts the idea of sovereignty to sovereignty in home affairs. The form of the State is reserved for settlement by the National Assembly and the National Council, or Provisional Government, in Paris; but both are vaguely described as “organs of the unanimous will of the nation.” In the revolutionary manifesto, the National Council calls itself, indeed, a Government, though it also calls itself, somewhat inexactly, the “only qualified and responsible organ.”
While the revolution was proceeding at Prague, certain members and delegates of the National Committee were negotiating with Dr. Beneš at Geneva, the negotiations deriving their significance from the fact that they were conducted by Dr. Kramář who was chairman of the National Committee. The points of agreement to which they led, on October 31, are more definite than the Prague documents of October 28. Some of these points have been published, others not. I possess Dr.
