Full resolution (JPEG) - On this page / på denna sida - Chapter V. Instances of Breach of the Minorities' Rights in Latvia and Eesti
<< prev. page << föreg. sida << >> nästa sida >> next page >>
Below is the raw OCR text
from the above scanned image.
Do you see an error? Proofread the page now!
Här nedan syns maskintolkade texten från faksimilbilden ovan.
Ser du något fel? Korrekturläs sidan nu!
This page has been proofread at least once.
(diff)
(history)
Denna sida har korrekturlästs minst en gång.
(skillnad)
(historik)
— 33 —
any foundation whatever, it is uncontrovertible that racial minorities,
such as the Balto-Saxons, Russians, Poles and Jews, should have the
right to maintain their own racial ideals; they are legally represented in
the Constituent Assembly, and are, by the constitution of the country,
entitled to defend their interests, but, since they form so small a
percentage of the whole population, it is simply unthinkable that they
could ever be a real menace to the Lettish and Estonian Commonwealth.
To any unpredjudiced mind, the real reason for the suppression ot
friendly societies and the expropriation of their property is, therefore,
only too apparent, in spite* of the excuses and pretexts advanced —
Latvia and Eesti have up till now been living on loot, this is the whole
question as it stands!
The most striking instance in expropriation may be seen in the
so-called Agrarian Reform, by which all private estates, larger than a
medium sized peasant farm, have been expropriated — in Eesti from
May 1st, and in Latvia, from October 1st 1920 — excepting only a plot
from 60 to 80 acres which is to be assigned to the original proprietors,
which land, according to the decision of the present Cabinet in Latvia,
must by no means contain, either the manor or the chief agricultural
buildings. According to the Agrarian Reform Act under the
Ulmanis-Cabinet, in certain cases, the plots of land surrounding the manor had
been legally assigned to their original owners, now by the
Meyerowiz-government, even this piece of land is suddenly confiscated, and the
unhappy owners are allotted a portion of land of regulation size in a
far remote corner, and sometimes not even on the same estate. Here
we have a double breach of the right of property! Furthermore, there
is nothing more deliberately aggravating in the whole Agrarian Reform
than the confiscation of houses where families have lived for
generations, which become hallowed places of family tradition and where
the intrinsic value is enhanced by ties of personal affection. It is easy
to understand how poignant such a mode of action is, which does not
bear the excuse of a necessitous economic provision, but is merely
adding insult to injury.
The Agrarian Reform has been used as a weapon against the
minorities. In this connection, it is not without piquancy that the President
of the Latvian Republic, Tschakste, owns an estate of some 330 acres in
the district of Bauske, while all other estates in the same neighbourhood
belonging to Balts have been expropriated and partitioned off, the
original proprietors being expelled from their homes.
Since 1919 the sale and purchase of plots of land in Latvija is only
permitted by special licence given by the Minister of Justice. Such
licence to buy land is only" granted to Letts. For instance, the
Agricultural Association of Balts at Bauske requested the Lettish
government for permission to acquire the estate of „Kautzmunde" for opening,
up nurseries, but they were refused as it was affirmed that Balts were
not permitted to acquire land. This is an example of how „racial
equality44 is understood in Latvia!
Agricultural and Industrial works which had been legally assigned
to Balts who had invested their capital in them to keep them going,
have been expropriated, thereby bringing about ruination.
<< prev. page << föreg. sida << >> nästa sida >> next page >>
