en of that uncertainty and the contradictory testimony of he the witnesses, but allowed them to go free. Although te the dead victims had not been Schutzbündler, and the

for

bey

all

of the

har

t of

et

P

lez

jury, who decided on the acquittal, consisted chiefly of stof men from the people, their verdict was the signal for a riot such as Vienna had not experienced since the Revoluhation of 1848. The verdict was made public late in the to evening of July 14. On the following morning the Socialist papers published an inflammatory article, calling for revenge, and declaring that the verdict condoned murder, that it was an expression of gross party bias, a 'blow at the popular sense of Right,' an enormity that cried for punishment, and that the Social Democrats would not pass it over. A storm then broke. There had been recently in Vienna several sensational acquittals which had aroused no wrath among the Social Democrats, or, indeed, caused any fuss. For instance, a butcher was acquitted who had murdered his wife and cut up her body (having expert knowledge); while a few weeks before the Schattendorf case, the wife of an Opera singer, who had shot her husband out of jealousy, was acquitted. In contrast to the shots at Schattendorf both those cases were murder in intention. Of this there could not be the slightest doubt. The public sense of moral right was unquestionably more injured by them than by the acquittal at Schattendorf, which was a verdict of not proven, inasmuch as the shots of the accused might be regarded as acts of self-defence. When, however, it directly concerned the Social Democrats it was another matter. Even although the dead boy was certainly no Social Democrat and the invalid soldier possibly not one either, still the men who had fired the shots were Frontkämpfer or were closely connected with that organisation. They had dared to fire on a Schutzbündler, and that was enough to brand them as criminals who must be punished. In this the Social Democrats showed a strange forgetfulness, for only a few years before in the Law Courts certain Social Democrat workmen who had brutally assaulted their principal, and thrown him into the river where he would have been drowned if he had not been able to swim, had been acquitted; and this not in a People's Court of Justice, but by a judge who obviously belonged to the Vol. 249.-No. 494.

2 B

same political party as the delinquents, or was closely connected with them. That was an incredible verdict, giving licence for every kind of brutality and insubordination, and must have revolted every right-thinking person, whatever his political opinions might be. So far from the sense of justice of the Social Democrats being outraged by that unjust verdict, it approved of it, because it was to their advantage. In the Schattendorf case, however, they broke into violence because the verdict was against themselves.

It should also be mentioned that the leading citizen newspapers of Vienna in this case seconded the Social Democratic press, voicing indignation at the verdict, though in more moderate ways. This was not through love for Social Democracy but out of hatred for the Frontkämpfer, a hatred of very simple origin-the Frontkämpfer are Anti-Semitic. The leading citizen newspapers of Vienna are in the hands of the Jews. Hence these tears!

Faced by the smoking ruins of the Palace of Justice and the blood splashed on the pavements, men hastened to join the Social Democrats, in order to make themselves safe, and to bring charges against others. Among those so maligned were the jury in the Schattendorf trial, because by their verdict they had outraged the sense of justice of the people; secondly, the police, because by their brutal handling of the mob they had greatly provoked it; and, thirdly, the Communists and the 'irresponsible elements,' who had taken advantage of the general excitement to plunder and fire the buildings. But each of these three charges is a lie, as audacious as it is evil, as can easily be proved.

As to the first lie, relating to the wounded sense of justice of the people, we have already seen what relation it had to this sense of justice, and how many other wrong verdicts had earlier been given without rousing a mob to plunder and destroy. But if the verdict in the Schattendorf trial had been essentially a miscarriage of justice, this would not have justified those who disapproved of it in injuring the means of communication; such as the railways, the post, the telegraph, telephone, even the wireless installations; in heading noisy processions, to say nothing of incendiarism and plunder. And

if the two other charges of the Social Democrats were ble true; if the police had exceeded their rights, and if the and irresponsible elements' had acted with such havoc, great blame still would attach to the Social Democrats, for they it was who began to injure the system of comDe munication in Austria, and thus gave the lead to the rioters. They even boasted that one sign on their part was enough to stop all wheels in Austria; that they were the masters of the country and could compel the State authorities to do whatever they wished.

With regard to the second false assertion of the he Social Democrats in accusing the police of brutality, it may be true that, taken by surprise, they did at first the make blunders, but it must not be forgotten that they f were faced by a tremendous task. Only 7000 policemen had to keep order in a town of two million inhabitants and and over an area of nearly twenty square kilometres, and it is natural that when they were fiercely attacked, and heard of the terrible death of their four Ja comrades who had been taken prisoners by the mob, they should have fought with all their power. Even if individual policemen did act unwarrantably, it is to the credit of the force as a whole that the mob was finally controlled, and only the Palace of Justice was sacrificed to their destructiveness. It was indeed the Head of the Police, Herr von Schober, who saved Vienna from something far worse, and in doing so performed a service which cannot be too highly appreciated. Think what would have happened if the police had not interfered or had acted with hesitation! Other valuable buildings must have been attacked and injured. The former Hof museums, with their countless and irreplaceable treasures of Art and Natural History, and the Hofburg which stands in close proximity to the Palace of Justice, must have fallen as sacrifices to the mob, to say nothing of other enormous dangers to the neighbourhood.

And now for the third lie of the Social Democrats: that with regard to the 'irresponsible elements.' In this elements must be numbered not only Communists and half-grown boys, but also numerous Social Democrats, officials of the Red Council Chamber, particularly those connected with the tramways; men who had a more than sufficient income, and cannot, therefore, be excused

ai

of th

Ac

fa

Ar

78

for

the

ag

OL

Th

the

dis

So

as penniless desperadoes. For what reason had the Social Democrats provided their workmen with clubs, iron poles, hammers, and other weapons of attack, when they passed in their thousands on the morning of July 15 from the outside districts into the centre of the town? The only reason for it was the deliberate intention to commit excesses. Boards carried by them bearing the inscription: 'We are marching to help ourselves,' leave no doubt as to that. The missiles and weapons of attack borne in a cart belonging to the Commune betray the close connexion between the excesses and the Red Council Chamber. Moreover, the 'irresponsible elements' could not have been able to produce the materials for the fire-pitchpine torches and benzine-so quickly if the workmen had not prepared for it. The fact that others beside idlers and vagabonds set fire to the Palace of Justice and committed outrages, may be seen from photographs taken on the spot. From these it is obvious that those who committed the excesses were for the most part not ragged individuals but well-dressed men. Nothing, however, betrays more clearly the close connexion between the Social Democrats and the incendiaries and looters than the fact that at first they would not allow any citizen newspaper to publish an account of the events of July 15 and 16, so that the only' Information' was that distributed by themselves. In doing this they achieved two objects: first, the people were prevented for a time, at least, from learning the truth; and secondly, the outside world could know nothing and therefore had no pretext for interference, and there was nothing the Social Democrats feared more than the interference of the Italians and Hungarians who are the most dangerous opponents of their influence. Significant, also, of their evil conscience and their anxiety to hide the truth is the fact that the Government should have liberated the arrested rioters. They were afraid of the ensuing trial when their complicity in the violence would have been shown up and they unmasked as liars.

Te

ser

The Social Democrats not only took part in the excesses but were also their originators; on them lies responsibility for all the horrors committed on July 15 in Vienna. The trial at Schattendorf was only a

welcome opportunity for them at last to realise their aims and to establish the Dictatorship of the Proletariat' which is their acknowledged goal. On the 'Day' of the Social Democratic Party, which had been kept in the previous autumn at Linz, the capital of Upper Austria, the majority of those present were already in favour of establishing a Dictatorship by force if the bourgeoisie were not willing to resign their supremacy; likewise Herr Deutsch, the General-in-Chief of the Red Army of Austria, already referred to as having held a review of the troops at St Pölten, had threatened to use force, even if the city should be shaken to its depths by it. In the same way, it was said, a long while before the elections, that if these did not turn out to the advantage of the Social Democrats, Vienna would 'experience something.' Certainly these were but vague rumours which might be regarded as empty threats. The great theft of weapons, however, from the Arsenal, which was discovered in the spring and greatly compromised the Social Democrats, showed that these reports and threats were not empty talk, but that actually in the Red camp serious things were being planned. It is true that they tried to deny any connexion with that robbery of arms, but they gave themselves away, for when the Government were prepared, in consequence, to take energetic steps, they threatened a general strike, and so identified themselves with it. That things did not go so far as a general strike, and the opportunity passed, may be attributed to the fact that the Government, alarmed by their own energy and the threats of the Social Democrats, did not follow up the matter. Also the leaders of the Social Democrats might not have thought the time suitable for a big move, as having an eye on Geneva they realised that if they entered the League of Nations the question of the robbery of the weapons must be faced.

In the May elections which followed, the Social Democrats won a small increase of seats, but there was little alteration of strength among the various parties and they had not secured their hoped-for majority in the National Council. The poor result was in strong contrast with the vast efforts made and the enormous sums of money spent by the Social Democratic Party on the elections. Although their newspapers tried to make

اک