Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T04:53:36.357Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Movement for Reform in Rumania After World War I: The Parliamentary Bloc Government of 1919-1920

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 January 2017

Victoria F. Brown
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In the labyrinthine world of Rumanian politics, it was easy enough to find striking examples of corruption in high places and low, year after year, both before and after World War I, and to dismiss the country's parliamentary form of M government as a sham or as an imitation of the West. But in 1919 many Rumanian had reason to expect the future to be brighter than the past. The approximate doubling of Rumanian territory and population and a happy ending, to the long-fought struggle for national unity seemed a most auspicious foundation for Rumania's new postwar life. Social justice and the exigencies of the modern world were being addressed by the advent of universal suffrage for men and the first stages of extensive land reform.

Type
Articles
Information
Slavic Review , Volume 38 , Issue 3 , September 1979 , pp. 456 - 472
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies. 1979

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Overviews of the Parliamentary Bloc government of 1919-20 are given in two recent articles (loan Scurtu, “Politica internă a guvernului Blocului parlamentar,” Revista arhivelor, 1975, no. 1, and Muşat, Mircea T., “Partidele politice şi alegerile parlamentare din 1919: Guvernarea Blocului parlamentar,” Anale de istorie, 1974, no. 1)Google Scholar, and parts of two books (loan Scurtu, Din viafa politică a româniei: Intemeierca ft activitatea partidului fărănesc [1918-1926] [Bucharest, 1975], and Mus, Mircea, at and Ardeleanu, Ion, Viafa politică in România, 1918-1921, 2nd. ed. [Bucharest, 1976]).Google Scholar The Musat and Ardeleanu book is by far the most comprehensive account to date of the origins, opinions, and activities of the major parties in early post-World War I Rumania.

2. For a rather self-serving view of mostly early Liberal Party history, see Ce a făcut partidul national-liberal de la intemeierea lui şi pîna azi (1848-1927) (Bucharest, n.d.). Zeletin, Stefan, Burghesia romana, originea si rolul ei istoric (Bucharest, 1925)Google Scholar, and Zeletin, , Neo-liberalismul (Bucharest, 1927)Google Scholar attempt to construct a historical-philosophical framework for Liberal activity.

3. The best account of Rumanian politics by a Conservative is Marghiloman, Alexandru, Note politice (1897-1924) (Bucharest, 1927)Google Scholar, the diary of the Progressive Conservative leader who often proves to be an acute observer. For his theoretical views, see Marghiloman, A., Doctrina conservatoare (Bucharest, 1923).Google Scholar The views of his rival Unionist Democrat (or Conservative Democrat or Nationalist Conservative) leader, Take Ionescu, can be consulted in Programul partidului democrat (Bucharest, 1920).

4. The clearest account by far of the People's League and apparently a valuable source of information and commentary on interwar Rumanian politics in general is the memoir of one of General Averescu's closest collaborators, Constantin Argetoianu, only a few excerpts of which have been published (see Magasin istoric, 1, nos. 1-9 [April-December 1967] and 2, nos. 1-3 [January-March 1968]; see also commentary in ibid., 4, no. 7 [July 1970]). This material, to which no Western researcher has yet been given access, is found in the Arhiva Comitetului Central al Partidul Communist Roman, fond 104, under the title, “Pentru cei de miine: Amintiri din vremea celor de ieri,” part 4, 1919-1927. (The information in the passage at hand is taken from M. Muşat and I. Ardeleanu, Viafa politică, p. 244 and comes from Argetoianu, “Pentru cei de miine,” part 4, p. 17). There are several adulatory and insubstantial biographies of Averescu, of which Cioroiu, U., O viafă de prestigiti: Alexandra Averescu maresal al Romăniei (Bucharest, 1931)Google Scholar is typical.

5. A great deal has been published, both by contemporaries and by recent writers on the Peasant Party. For the Peasants’ philosophy, see, for example, Virgil, Madgearu, Tărănismul (Bucharest, n.d.)Google Scholar, and Madgearu, , Doctrina fărănista (Bucharest, 1923)Google Scholar. See also Ornea, Z., Tărănismul: Studiu sociologic (Bucharest, 1969)Google Scholar, and George C. Marica, “Contribute la istoria politica a taranismului 1819-1926,” unpublished manuscript. Mitrany, David, The Land and the Peasant in Romania (London, 1930)Google Scholar, and Roberts, Henry L., Rumania: The Political Problems of an Agrarian State (New Haven, 1951)Google Scholar are still by far the best overall accounts in a Western language of interwar Rumanian peasant problems.

6. Much work has now been clone on the pre-World War I Rumanian National Party of Transylvania. Daicoviciu, Constantin, Pascu, Stefan, Cherestesiu, V., and Morariu, T., Din istoria Transylvaniei (Bucharest, 1960)Google Scholar brings a large amount of material together, providing a background for understanding National Party activities after unification. For both Peasants and Transylvanians in the interwar period, see §eicaru, Pamfil, Istoria partidelor national, fărănist si nationaltar dnist (Madrid, 1963)Google Scholar. For National Party development between 1918 and 1926, see Victoria F. Brown, “The Romanian National Party and the Political Integration of Transylvania into Greater Romania” (Ph.D. diss., University of Washington, 1972).

7. Nicolae Iorga's own extensive and often insightful writings are the best guide to his changing political views. See especially, Iorga, Nicolae, Memorii, 6 vols. (Bucharest, n.d.)Google Scholar; Iorga, , Romania contemporana de la 1904 la 1930. Supt trei regi, Istoria a unei lupte pentru un ideal moral şi national, 2nd ed. (Bucharest, 1932)Google Scholar; and Iorga, , O viafă de om: Asa cum a fost, 3 vols. (Bucharest, 1932).Google Scholar

8. There is no satisfactory biography of King Ferdinand—merely anniversary volumes— although a good deal of scattered material for one does exist in the Arhivele Statului Bucuresti and in published sources. A careful study is needed of Ferdinand's reign, his relationship to Ionel Bratianu, the role of Queen Maria, and the influence of the so-called camarilla of friends and relatives at court.

9. A succinct description of the Liberal tendency to resign strategically at difficult moments is given by Spector, Sherman David, Rumania at the Paris Peace Conference: A Study of the Diplomacy of loan I. C. Bratianu (New York, 1962), p. 188.Google Scholar

10. This is generally considered to have been among the least rigged of interwar parliamentary elections, although the abstensions, particularly that of Averescu's League, gave the results a less than universal character. The followers of Nicolae lorga won twenty-seven seats and those of Alexandru Marghiloman won thirteen. The other seats went to various smaller parties (Buletinul statistic al Romaniei, no. 3 [Bucharest, 1920], p. 2, table 4).

11. Patria, December 1, 1919.

12. Seton-Watson, R. W., A History of the Roumanians from Roman Times to the Completion of Unity, reprinted ed. (Hamden, Conn., 1963), p. 547.Google Scholar

13. Times (London), March 16, 1920.

14. Spector, Rumania at the Paris Peace Conference, p. 214, see also p. 313, n. 52. .

15. Ibid., p. 219.

16. Iorga, O via\a de om, 3: 28-29.

17. Marghiloman, Note politice, vol. 5, February 9, 1920.

18. Octavian Goga resigned upon Averescu's departure from the government, and Aurel Vlad and Victor Bontescu left on March 2, 1920.

19. Mu§at and Ardeleanu, Viata politico, p. 140.

20. Iorga, Memorii, vol. 2, December 15, 1919, February 9, 1920, and March 7, 1920.

21. See page 470.

22. See Zaharia Boila, “Incadrarea romanilor din Transylvania in viata politica a Romania intregite, perioda 1918-1926,” unpublished manuscript, p. 11.

23. The other members of the cabinet named on December 5 were: General I. Rascanu, minister of war; Aurel Vlad, minister of finance and interim minister of industry and commerce; Victor Bontescu, minister of agriculture; Octavian Goga, minister of public instruction and religion; Mihail Popovici, minister of public works; Ion Pelivan, minister of justice. Ion Inculet, Pantelimon Halippa, Ion Nistor, Stefan Pop and Ion Cantecuzino were appointed ministers of state. On Peasant Party reluctance to join the cabinet, see P. Seicaru, Istoria partidului national, taranist si national-tar anist, p. 32.

24. Dezbaterile Adun Deputatilor, session of November 1919-March 1920, no. 8, December 9, 1919.

25. “De ce a demisionat d. Averescu?,” Steagul, December 19, 1919; Patria, December 25, 1919; Z. Boila, “Incadrarea romanilor,” p. 11.

26. For the agrarian situation at this time, see Lungu, Tr. and Rusenescu, M., “Miscarile Jaranesti in decembrie 1919-octombrie 1920,” in Relafii agrare si miscdri tdrdnesti in Romania, 1908-1921 (Bucharest, 1967), pp. 474–508 Google Scholar; and Arhivele Statului Bucuresti, fond Ministerul de Interne, dosar 459/1919, fila 97, and fond Presedintia Consilului de Mini§tri, dosar 121/1920, file 49 and 51.

27. Dezbaterile Adunarii Deputatilor, no. 14, December 16, 1919.

28. Ibid., no. 60, March 12, 1920. *

29. Iorga, Memorii, vol. 2, February 23, 1920. The queen also thought it “a Bolshevik law” and said Ferdinand would never sign it (see Marghiloman, Note politice, vol. 5, February 16, 1920).

30. Interview with Lupu in Tara noud, February 1, 1920. For the text of the bill, see Dezbaterile Senatului, no. 42, March 8, 1920.

31. Scurtu, “Politica interna a guvernului Blocului parlamentar,” p. 53; Scurtu, Din viata politico, p. 40; and Musat and I. Ardeleanu, Viata politicd, p. 163. For examples of gendarme abuses see Arhivele Statului Bucuresti, fond Parlament, dosar 1, 868/1919-1920, file 26-27.

32. Dezbaterile Adundrii Deputatilor, no. 60, March 12, 1920; and democratiei, Federatia, Proiectul legei de improprietdrirea tdranilor (Bucharest, 1920).Google Scholar

33. Memoriul agricultorilor mari-cu privire la expropriere (Bucharest, 1920).

34. Iorga mentions numerous examples of royal fears (see, for example, Iorga, Memorii, vol. 2, January 20, 1920 and February 19, 1920; and Iorga, O viata de om, 3: 32).

35. Marghiloman, Note politice, vol. 5, January 2, 1920.

36. Argetoianu, “Pentru cei de miine,” part 4, p. 287 (cited by Musat and Ardeleanu in Viata politico, p. 258).

37. Dezbaterile Adunarii Deputajilor, no. 58, March 10, 1920; Dezbaterile Senatului, session of November 1919-March 1920, , no. 45, March 11, 1920.

38. Dezbaterile Senatului, no. 46, March 12, 1920.

39. Arhivele Statului Bucuresti, iond Ministerul Afacerilor Exteme, dosar special 42, telegrams no. 662 from Paris and no. 523 from London; see also “Chestia ‘telegramei, ’” Tara noua, March 10, 1920.

40. Mu§at and Ardeleanu, Viafa politics., p. 217.

41. Iorga, Memorii, vol. 2, March 12, 1920.

42. Dezbaterile Adunarii Deputatilor, no. 60, March 12, 1920.

43. Iorga, Memorii, vol. 2, March 13, 1920.

44. loan Scurtu, “Lupta partidelor politice in alegerile parlamentare din mai-iunie 1920,” Carpica, 1972, pp. 251-64.

45. Iorga, O viata de om, 3: 21.

46. For the work of the Consiliul Dirigent, see Boila, Romul, “Consiliul Dirigent,” in Transylvania, Banatul, Crisana, Maramuresul 1918-1923, 3 vols. (Bucharest, 1927), 1: 89–101.Google Scholar

47. Mitrany, Land and Peasant, p. 102.

48. See ibid., p. 112; Sandru, D., Re forma agrara, din 1921 in Romania (Bucharest, 1975), p. 60 Google Scholar; H. L. Roberts, Rumania, p. 27; and Scurtu, loan, “Proiectul de lege agrara depus din initiativa parlamentara in martie 1920,” Analele Universitdfii Bucuresti: Istorie, 1969, no. 2, p. 97.Google Scholar