sign in sign up
<<
Home , Law of Lithuania, League of Nations

[Communicated to the Members of the Council.] C. 149.1 9 2 5 . 1.

Geneva, March gth, 1925.

LEAGUE OF

MINORITIES IN

Situation of the Polish Minority in Lithuania

(See Council Document C. 31. 1925. I.)

Note by the -General. In a letter dated March 6th, 1925, the Lithuanian communicated to the Secre tary-General some further observations regarding the situation of the Polish minority in Lithuania The Secretary-General has the honour to communicate herewith to the Members of the Council for their information the above-mentioned letter and observations.

LETTER ADDRESSED TO THE SECRETARY-GENERAL BY THE LITHUANIAN DELEGATE TO THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS.

Geneva, March 6th, 1925.

I have the honour to forward to you the enclosed memorandum concerning the situation of the Polish minority in Lithuania, with the request that you will communicate it to the Members of the Council. Annexes I to IV will follow this document as soon as possible.

(Signed) V. S idzikauskas , Lithuanian Delegate to the League oj Nations. Lithuanian Minister at Berlin.

MEMORANDUM CONCERNING THE SITUATION OF THE POLISH MINORITY IN LITHUANIA

submitted to the Council of the League oj Nations by the Lithuanian Government.

The so-called Committee of Exiled , whose headquarters are at Vilna, has addressed several petitions to the Council of the League of Nations accusing Lithuania of not observing the provisions of the Minorities Declaration of May 12th, 1922, and of persecuting the Polish minority in Lithuania. The Lithuanian Government, in its note of May 28th, 1924, addressed to M. , Chief ol the Minorities Section, and in a letter submitted to Sir Eric Drummond, the Secretary-General of the League, dated November 4th of the same year, had the honour to communicate to the Council of the League all its observations regarding the complaints by the so-called Committee of Exiles. The Council Committee of the League of Nations constituted in conformity with the Council resolution of October 25th, 1920, and consisting of M. Benes, M. Quinones de Léon and Mr. Chamberlain, at its meeting on December n th , 1924, at Rome, expressed the wish to receive from the Lithuanian Government supplementary explanations as regards the following points : 1. The assertion of the petitioners that Polish publications are hardly ever permitted by the authorities (pages 8 et seq. of the petition of June 1st, 1924. and letter of the petitioners dated August 12th, 1924, with annexes). 2. The assertion of the petitioners (page 10 of the Memorandum dated June 1st, 1924) that insurmountable obstacles are placed in the way of Polish private teaching in Lithuania. 3. Agrarian Reform. — In order to appreciate the importance of the complaints of the peti­ tioners on this matter, it would seem desirable that the Lithuanian Government should place at the disposal of the Council statistics showing how agrarian reform has been put into practice.

S. d. N. 10J. (A) 3/25. Imp. Kundig The Lithuanian Government may perhaps also desire to furnish the Council with statistics concern­ ing expropriation without compensation carried out in the course of agrarian reform, indicating at the same time the legislative provisions in virtue of which this expropriation was effected. In order to facilitate an exchange of views with the Lithuanian Government on these questions the Council Committee thought it expedient that the question of the situation of the Polish Mino­ rity in Lithuania should be placed upon the agenda of the next session of the Council. The Government of the Lithuanian Republic makes the strictest reservations as to the procedure adopted by the Council Committee in pursuance of the petitions from the so-called Committee of Exiled Poles. These reservations are particularly necessary because : (i) the so-called Committee of Exiled Poles at Vilna, without presenting or possessing any authorisation to speak in the name of the whole Polish minority in Lithuania, poses as the spokesman and defender of the interests of all the Poles in this country ; and (2) the members of the so-called Committee of Poles have never been exiled by the Lithuanian Government from the territory under its administration: they belong to circles which, after having taken part in mischievous plots against the safety and the very existence of the Lithuanian State, established their headquarters on the other side of the line of demarcation between the Lithuanian and Polish troops which was traced immediately after General Zeligowski’s coup de force. Furthermore, the president of this Committee, M. Lopacinski, has never lived in territory forming part of the reconstituted State of Lithuania, but is a native of the province of Vitebsk, which is at present subject to Soviet . As a matter of fact, the persons composing this Committee of Exiles are merely willing tools in the hands of Poland in the pursuit of her anti-Lithunania policy. Their role consists in representing the situation of the Polish minority in this country in the darkest colours and in thus diverting the attention of the League of Nations and of public opinion throughout the world from the intolerable state of affairs created by the Polish occupation of the Vilna area. At the same time, the Lithuanian Government, not wishing for the moment to emphasise too strongly this aspect of the question, but desiring to throw all possible light upon the present situation of the Polish minority in Lithuania, ventures to submit to the Council certain facts which it is essential to take into account before any accurate view of the complaints received from the so-called Committee of Exiled Poles at Vilna can be formed. The Lithuanian Government desires also to observe that, in its opinion, Lithuanian policy, as regards the use of languages, public education and agrarian reform, can only concern the Council of the League of Nations in so far as this policy is proved by facts to be in flagrant contradiction with international undertakings given by Lithuania.

I

A s s e r t io n o f t h e P e t i t i o n e r s t h a t P o l is h P ublications a r e h a r d l y e v e r p e r m it t e d b y t h e A u t h o r it ie s (pages 8 et seq. of the Petition of June 1st, 1924, and letter of the petitioners dated August 12th, 1924, with annexes).

The question of languages was settled in Lithuania by the Constitution itself, paragraph 6 of which is as follows : “The official language shall be Lithuanian”. The use of local languages is regulated by the . It has not so far been possible to apply this law, as well as a number of other also provided for in the Constitution, owing to the comparatively short time that has elapsed since the Constitution was voted, and owing to the necessity imposed upon the Lithuanian Government and legislative body of devoting themselves almost exclusively to laying the juri­ dical, economic and financial foundations of the State. Nevertheless, the Lithuanian Government is doing its utmost to submit to at as early a date as possible a bill to give effect to the above-mentioned provision in the Constitution. The Lithuanian Government can here and now declare that the law in question will be in complete harmony with paragraphs 3 and 4 of Article 4 of the Minorities Declaration dated May 12th, 1922, which stipulate that:

“No restriction will be imposed on the free use by any Lithuanian national of any language in private intercourse, in commerce, in religion, in the press or in publications of any kind, or at public meetings. “Notwithstanding any establishment of an official language, adequate facilities will be given to Lithuanian nationals of non-Lithuanian speech for the use of their languages, either orally or in writing, before the Courts.”

The Lithuanian Government can also state that there is in Lithuania to-day no law or regu­ lation in contradiction with the provisions of the said declaration. The truth of this statsment will be evident from the analysis we are proposing to make, point by point, of the charges brought against the Lithuanian Government by the so-called Committee of Exiled Poles at Vilna.

Polish Press.

The petitioners complain that, contrary to the provisions of Article 4, paragraph 3, of the declaration dated May 12th, 1922, the Lithuanian authorities have five times suspended the only Polish newspaper in Lithuania. This assertion calls for the following observations: (1) The newspaper Dziennik Kowienski, mentioned in the Committee’s petition, is not the only Polish newspaper in Lithuania. The Polish minority, despite its numerical weakness, has four newspapers appearing in Polish : the Chata Rodzinna, the Dzien Kowienski, the Nowiny and the Wiadomosci Rolnicze. The Lithuanian Government considers that this alone is proof of the tolerance shown towards the Polish minority ; and at a time, too, when Lithuanian newspapers in Lithuanian districts under Polish occupation are persecuted in a manner unparalleled in any civilised country, simply because they appear in Lithuanian. (2) The petitioners have omitted to mention in their appeal that the Dzien Kowienski has several times been punished, not because of the language in which it appears nor because it is a minority organ but by reason of breaches of the general press regulations. Owing to the extremely difficult circumstances in which the reconstitution of Lithuania as a State took place, and in view also of the geographical position of the country, the Lithuanian Government has been compelled to keep an exceedingly watchful eye upon subversive elements which have frequently tried to use the principle of the freedom of the press as a cover under which to conduct campaigns dangerous to the and very existence of the State. Nevertheless, neither the Lithuanian Press Law of November 30th, 1919, nor the compulsory regulations of October nth, 1921, and December 20th 1922, which were promulgated by the Military Governor at Kovno and based on the Law for the Special Defence of the State dated February 7th, 1917, contain any provision contrary to Article 4, paragraph 3, of the Minorities Declaration. These measures, which were provisional and were adopted by the Lithuanian Government in order to preserve internal order and peaceful relations abroad, were applied impartially to the whole Lithuanian press, whether majority or minority ; in fact, they were applied more strictly to the former than to the latter, as clearly appears from the following table : Administrative measures have been taken against the following newspapers:

Lietuvos Lietuvos Chata Dzien Wiad Year Laisvé 1 Nowiny Balsas 2 Zinios 3 Rodzinna Ko iv Rolnicz

1920 ...... I _ 1921 ...... — ■ I — I— —— 1922 ...... III — I— — — 1923 ...... —• 5 I I J — 1924 ...... — i ■— I I

Total . 2 8 2 3 5 — —

1 Organ of the Government Party (Christian Democrat) 2 Organ of the Lithuanian Nationalists. 3 Organ of the Lithuanian Radical Peasants Party.

Note. — The Lietuvos Balsas was formerly known as the Vairas, and the paper now known as the Chata Rodzinna was formerly the Strezcha Rodzinna. Remark. — Extracts from the Lithuanian laws regarding the press and the special defence of the State, as well as from the compulsory regulations of the Governor at Kovno referred to above, are attached to the present memorandum (Annexes I to IV).

Tarring oj Signboards.

The petitioners complain that in the towns of Kovno, Sauliaï, Ponieveje and Kiejdany the signboards of Polish business houses have been smeared with tar by an organised band of Lithua­ nian terrorists, and they accuse the Lithuanian Government of having allowed these acts to be committeed under the eyes of the authorities. It is true that some cases have been recorded in which the signboards of business premises painted in some language other than Lithuanian — some of them in Polish were smeared with tar. At the same time the Lithuanian Government categorically refutes all accusations against it in this connection, which are contrary to facts. The police adopted, with effect, a large number of measures against such excesses. The very night when the offence wascommitted the police made several arrests, and the perpetrators — for the most part college students weie punished m accordance with the law. At Sauliaï (Schavly) the offenders — Tismaskine, Radvilas, Iaunoutis, Montvidas and Kimeris — were brought before the courts. At Mariampol the magistrate imposed heavy fines on Vabarskis, Naudzius, Slavinas and certain other persons. Thanks to the inter­ vention of the judicial authorities and the police, no further cases of this kind have occurred.

Confiscation and Destruction of Election Posters. Prohibition to use the . Prohibition to give Performances of Polish Plays.

The petitioners complain : [a) That towards the end of the police confiscated at Sauliaï from members of the Polish Central Committee in this constituency, all election circulais, pamp ets and posters ; (b) That the police tore down the election posters containing the Polish list at Samuelow, a commune of Zasliaï, although these posters had been approved by the local authorities; (c) That on April 15th, 1923, the police forbade the use of Polish at an election meeting at Adampol in the constituency of Poneveje; (d) That the police removed all messages of welcome in Polish from the triumphal arch erected by the parishioners of Wendziagola during the pastoral journey of Mgr, Karevicius, Bishop of Samogitia ; (e) That on June 14th, 1923, the Military Governor of Kovno refused permission to the association “ Jednosc ” (Polish Christian workmen) to perform a play named “Skalmierzanki” ; (/) That in May 1922 the General Manager of the State Railways published a decree forbidding the employees and subordinate staff to use any other language than Lithua­ nian, either among themselves or when addressing passengers. Those who spoke Polish were dismissed.

The Lithuanian Government categorically denies the charges contained under (a), (b), (c) and (d). It learns for the first time, through the Polish petition to the League of Nations, of the alleged actions by the police, no complaint having been submitted to the Lithuanian Government or to its organs by the alleged victims of these illegal acts. An enquiry into the matter ordered by the Lithuanian Government yielded no result. As regards (e), it must be observed that the assertion of the petitioners to the effect that the Governor refused permission to the Polish Workmen’s Association “Jednosc” to perform the Polish play “Skalmierzanki’’ is not in accordance with the facts, since this association, a long time age, received permission to play" this piece by a decision of the Ministry of the Interior, and the piece has been freely performed at Kovno, although it concluded with the singing of the Polish national hymn. Point (/) : The Director of the gave orders to his officials and employees through a circular to address passengers in the official language, and only to use another language where passengers did not understand Lithuanian. Moreover, this circular, regarding the use of languages, only applied to working hours. The petitioners deliberately distort the truth when they assert that railway officials and employees using Polish have been dismissed for the reasons given. In their memorandum to the League of Nations they have not been able to quote a single specific fact or name in support of their assertions.

Signs on Business Premises.

In their letter addressed to the Secretary7- General of the League of Nations dated August I2th> 1924, the Committee of “Exiles” communicates to the League a compulsory7 regulation issued by the district authorities with regard to the language to be used on signs of all kinds and in any inscriptions and advertisements publicly displayed in the streets, in squares and on roadsides, as well as in public and private institutions. They assert that this regulation is contrary? to Articles 1 and 4 of the Minorities’ Declaration dated May 12th, 1922. The question of signs on business premises in the provisional capital of Lithuania and in other Lithuanian towns is of a peculiar nature. Russian domination, then the world- and the rapid succession of different regimes which accompanied it, and, finally, the long occupation by the German army, which imposed on Lithuanian towns German signs and inscriptions —• all these events resulted in a perfect medley of languages on trade signs, and the Government was bound to take measures to settle this matter, which was one of immediate concern to the Lithuanian people. Public opinion became impatient, and this attitude found expression in certain excesses — few in number, it is true, but sufficiently symptomatic to necessitate action by7 the authorities. The Lithuanian Government considers that Article 4, paragraph 3, of the Minorities Declara­ tion, which lays down that no restriction will be imposed on the free use by any Lithuanian national of any? language in private intercourse, in commerce, in religion, in the press, or in publications of any7 kind, or at public meetings, does not apply7 to business signs. According to Lithuanian law, these signs constitute one of the essential attributes of business firms, which are regarded in Lithua­ nia as public institutions. Nor can the signs be regarded as publications, within the meaning of Article 4, paragraph 3, while the free use of any language in private intercourse or in commerce applies to correspondence and to all operations of purchase and sale but not to the installation of business firms. In practice, this provision has affected the Polish minority in Lithuania to an insignificant extent, by reason of the tiny percentage of Polish firms. The complaint to the League of Nations on this subject is made with a purely political object. Furthermore, the Lithuanian Government has the honour to inform the Council that, by Circular No. 6070, dated October 9th, 1924, the Minister of the Interior decreed that the compulsory regulations of the district authorities should not apply to inscriptions or advertisements, and that no restriction was to be imposed on the free use of Polish and other minority languages either in commerce or in publications of any kind. Laws regarding the Accounts of Commercial, Industrial and Credit Institutions.

In a telegram addressed to the President of the Council of the League dated December 7th, 1924, the petitioners point also to the recent law regarding the accounts of commercial, industrial and credit institutions as being in contradiction to international undertakings entered into by Lithuania with regard to the minorities. The relevant paragraph in the above-mentioned law is as follows : "Paragraph 9. Accounts shall be kept in the official language of the State. “Note. — The commercial and industrial institutions referred to in paragraphs 3 and 4 of this law may, for a period of one year from the date of the promulgation of "the law, keep the books referred to in the law in the local language instead of in the official language. “Whenever accounts are not kept in the official language, the institutions concerned are required, at the request of the Comptroller of Taxes, to supply him with an authentic translation of the above-mentioned books in the official language.”

The Lithuanian Government would once again draw the attention of the Council to the fact that, in this case, as in all the others, the petitioners have entire!}' distorted the truth. The law in question was promulgated for purely fiscal reasons, particularly with a view to the collection of taxes. The Lithuanian Government and Parliament have never intended to prevent owners of commercial, industrial and credit institutions from keeping their bu[ines accounts in any language they choose. Nevertheless, the Lithuanian legislators could not ‘countenance a state' of affairs under which taxation officials would have been obliged to employ an excessive number of languages in order to control certain accounts specially required for fiscal purposes. There can be no question of any serious contradiction between the provisions of the Law- regarding accounts and the Declaration of May 12th, 1922, with regard to minorities.

II.

The Assertion of t h e P e t it io n e r s (page 10 of the Memorandum dated June 1st, 1924) that I nsurmountable O bstacles ar e pla ced in th e W a y o f P olish P rivate T eaching in L it h u a n ia .

Paragraph 73 of the Lithuanian Constitution grants to the ethnical minorities, within the limits fixed by the laws, the right to the independent management of their national interests — popular education, etc. Article 5 of the Minorities Declaration made by the Lithuanian Government to the Council of the League of Nations contains the same provision in more detailed form. At the present time there does not exist in the Lithuanian Republic an}- law or regulation contrary to the provision regarding minorities. Moreover, the petitioners themselves do not mention in their Memorandum any contradiction between the Lithuanian laws and the Declara­ tion of May 12th, 1922. They simply cite a few alleged illegal acts on the part of the Lithuanian authorities in the matter of Polish private teaching, quoting as a consequence of these acts the small number of Polish private schools as compared with the number of Jewish private schools (page 10 of the Memorandum of June 1st). What are these acts of which the Lithuanian authorities are accused ? 1. Military governors are accused of having deported persons who had applied to the authorities for permission to open Polish schools. A case of this kind is alleged to have occurred in the district of Koshedary. Associations or persons desiring to open private schools are not required by Lithuanian law to apply to the local military governors, who have no jurisdiction in the matter of public teaching, even in districts where martial law has been proclaimed. The petitioners' assertion with regard to the Koshedary district was discovered upon investigation to be devoid of all foundation. The accusation is so absurd that the petitioners themselves have been unable to give any details, particularly as regards the names of the alleged victims of this measure. 2. The Polish Association “ Oswiata ” at Sauliaï is said to have been refused permission to open a private Polish school in that town. It must be remarked that the Lithuanian authorities have no objection at all to these associa­ tions opening a private Polish school, on condition that the expenses are borne by the association. The “ Oswiata” , however, demands that the town of Sauliaï should furnish the funds. According to the laws in force in Lithuania, however, Polish schools cannot be founded at the expense of the municipalities or of the Ministry of Education, except at the rate of one school for ever}7 500 inhabitants and every 32 children of school age. This provision applies to the opening of all schools, whether Lithuanian or minority. The latest official census figures for the whole of Lithua­ nia show that, out of a population of 21,160, Sauliaï contains only 119 persons belonging to the Polish minority and a very small number of children of school age. It is true that the "Oswiata submitted an appeal to the authorities accompanied by a list of Polish children of school age living at Sauliaï, but inv estigation by the Education Committee of Sauliaï revealed the fact that the association’s appeal was signed by persons who did not live there or who had no children, and that the list accompanying the appeal, which moreover did not contain the requisite number, included children who had not reached school age and persons who had long left the primary school. 3- The petitioners complain that the authorities levied 3,800 dollars, by way of a tax on gifts, upon the premises which had been presented as a gift to the "Oswiata In this matter the Lithuanian authorities have only acted in accordance with the law of December 6th, 1919, which applies to all associations of this kind, both Lithuanian and minority. 4. According to the memorandum of June 1st, the existing private Polish schools have been subjected to numerous persecutions, of which the following are examples :

(a) In the Spring of 1923, Mile. Taraskievitch, the owner of the Polish school at Pacunielé, and Mile. Maciejunas, a teacher in the school, were ordered to be deported. (b) One might Lithuanian terrorists threw a bomb at the private Polish school at Sydlava. The offenders went unpunished. (c) On March 2nd, 1924, a bomb was thrown at a house in Ukmergé (Vilkomir), where a performance was being given by some amateurs on behalf of the Polish college in that place. The door and the first floor windows were damaged. The criminals were not punished.

These complaints call for the following observations: It is true that Mile. Taraskievitch and Mile. Maciejunas were ordered by the local authorities to leave Pacunielé for having illegally started a school there. Nevertheless, in response to an appeal which they addressed to the higher authorities, the resolution of the local authorities was cancelled five days later. With regard to the incidents — quite unimportant — at Sydlava and Ukmergé, it should be pointed out that the judicial authorities and the police immediately took all the necessary measures to find out and punish the offenders. At l'kmergé it was ascertained in the course of the enquiry which was ordered that a hand-grenade, of the size of an egg, was thrown from the cloak-room, and not from outside, by a Polish member of the audience with intent to stir up trouble. The accusations made against the Lithuanian authorities in this matter are tendentious and devoid of all foundation. 5. By a circtdar from the Ministry of Public Education dated January 10th, 1924, which introduced a new curriculum into non-Lithuanian secondary schools, the geography and history of Poland were excluded from the subjects taught. No Lithuanian law, no governmental act and no circular from the Ministry of Education, as alleged by the petitioners, prohibit the teaching of Polish geography and history in Polish schools. The assertion of the Committee of "Exiles” is a pure invention. The Lithuanian Government attaches to this memorandum a French translation of the circular in question (Annex 5). A few months ago the Lithuanian Government had the honour to inform the Minorities Section of the League of Nations of the manuals of Polish geography and history used by the Polish schools in Lithuania kept up or aided by the State. The manuals of geography represent Lithuania as forming part of Poland. As to the history books, they are tendenciously written and extremely offensive to Lithuania. It may be of interest to mention here that in the Faculty of Letters at the Lithuanian Uni­ versity at Kovno, Polish literature and history are taught as compulsory subjects to all students in certain branches, whereas at Vilna, the capital of that part of Lithuania occupied by the Polish troops, Lithuanian history and literature are excluded from the curriculum. While furnishing these explanations, the Lithuanian Government desires at the same time to point out that in its opinion questions relating to the programmes and schemes of instruction in Lithuanian schools do not come within the scope of the international obligations entered into by Lithuania as regards her minority populations. The following statistics are the best proof that the complaints of the petitioners as regards Polish teaching in Lithuania are devoid of all foundation in fact, and are addressed to the League of Nations for purely political purposes :

A. Statistics relating to Primary Schools at Kovno at date of December 31 st, 1924.

Distribution of the Cost of upkeep population of Kovno borne by according Number of Number of Number of the municipality Nationality to the 1923 census schools classes pupils

Amount Percentage Total Percentage number

Lithuanian...... 24 60 2,291 155,792 45-4 54,520 58.8 P o lish ...... II 28 U294 79,060 23-3 4,193 4-5 Jewish...... 10 26 1,339 71,900 21.3 25,045 27.2 G e rm a n ...... 3 10 456 22,300 6-5 3,269 3-6 Russian...... 2 5 227 11,900 3-5 2,914 3.2 B. Primary Schools in Lithuania in 1924.

Minority schools Number of schools Number of classes Number of pupils

P o lish ...... 26 57 2,728 Mixed Polish and Lithuanian . . . 21 22 944

47 79 3,672 J ewish...... III 201 9,932 G e rm a n ...... 16 28 1,520 L a tv ia n ...... 9 11 513 White R ussian...... 1 i 36 R u ssia n ...... 11 15 725

Total . . . 195 335 16,398

C. Secondary Schools in Lithuania in 1924.

Minority schools Number of schools Jew ish...... 23 P o lis h ...... 5 R u s s ia n ...... 1 G e rm a n ...... 2 L a tv ia n ...... 1

Total...... ^2

I). Grants from the Treasury to Minority Schools in 1924.

Percentage of Schools Amount the Ministry of Education Budget

Polish...... 536,524.25 3-49 Je w ish ...... 1,174,700.24 7-55 German...... 163,811.42 1.052 Latvian...... 61,068.32 0-395 White Russian...... 4,128 0.028 Russian...... 61,820 0.4

Total . . 2,002,052.23 12.915

According to the general census for 1923, the Polish minority in Lithuania forms 3.18 per cent ol the whole population of the Republic. Thus, even if we exclude the town of Kovno, where Polish schools occupy a privileged position and where the primary schools are supported by the municipality, the funds supplied by the Treasury to the Polish schools are larger than those which the Polish minority could expect to receive in virtue of its numerical strength. Lastly, the Committee of Polish “Exiles” claims that the Polish population in Lithuania possesses a smaller number of schools and pupils than the Jewish population, and attributes this to the unfriendly attitude of the Lithuanian Government towards the Polish minority. It is a fact that the number of Jewish schools in Lithuania is higher than the number of Polish schools, but this is due (1) to the numerical superiority of the Jewish population over the Polish population and (2) to the fact that the Polish minority is scattered among the country districts, whereas the Jewish population constitutes a compact urban block.

III.

A g r a r ia n R e f o r m .

The Lithuanian Government reserves the right to explain to the Council of the League of Nations, through its delegation, the political, economic and social causes which made agrarian reform in Lithuania inevitable. These causes were not peculiar to Lithuania. Their effects were felt in more or less similar circumstances in all the States in Central and , both in those which regained their former independence or achieved their territorial aspirations after the upheaval produced by the world war, and also in those countries which were then, for the first time, established as independent States. In the present memorandum the Lithuanian Government will content itself with answering the questions put by the Council, supplementing them with a few observations which are called for by the complaints of the Committee of Polish “Exiles”. (i) In order to create the impression that the Law on Agrarian Reform is contrary to the Minorities Declaration of May 12th, 1922, which proclaims equality before the law for all Lithua­ nian nationals without distinction of race, language or religion, the petitioners assert that more than nine-tenths of the persons affected by the Agrarian Law belong to the Polish minority and that this fact is the prime motive of the agrarian reform. According to the petitioners the Law- on Agrarian Reform belongs to a category of laws which, under the guise of general and impartial provisions, conceal a policy directed against a national minority. It is this belief which inspires the accusation that the Agrarian Law is contrary to Article IV of the Declaration dated May 12th, 1922, which article provides that "all Lithuanian nationals shall be equal before the law, and shall enjoy the same civil and political rights without distinction as to race, language or religion’’. It must first of all be observed that Lithuanian legislation in this matter was framed in accordance with economic and social requirements, and that it was not in the least concerned with any considerations of politics or nationality. In addition to paragraphs 7 and 8 of the Law on Agrarian Reform, a circular by the Minister of Agriculture, called the "Scheme for the application of the Law on Agrarian Reform,” illustrates very clearly the real intentions of Lithua­ nian legislation and of the Lithuanian Government in this matter. The Lithuanian Govern­ ment ventures to attach to the present memorandum a French translation of this circular as well as of Articles 7 and 8 of the Law on Agrarian Reform (Annexes 6 and 7). The petitioners distort the truth when they assert that the Poles constitute more than nine- tenths of the persons affected by the Agrarian Law. The following statistics show the inaccuracy of this assertion :

Total Area oj Lan ajjected by the Lau on Agrarian Reform.

Owners of Ian 1 Units Xrea in hectares ...... ■ • • «35 209,356 P o l e s ...... • • ■ 1.529 382,113 R ussians...... 278 74,701 G erm ans...... 47,718 J e w s ...... • • • 55 14,891 L atv ian s...... 42 7,005 T a r t a r s ...... 1 4,445 Portuguese...... 4 1,108 Others ...... • • • 30 4,964

Total . • • ■ 2,995 746,301

Accordingly, the area of land in Lithuania affected by the agrarian reform schei of estates belonging to:

Classification Percentage Owners of land according to area of total area P o l e s ...... I 51.15 Lithuanians ...... II 28.13 R ussians...... Ill 9.99 G erm ans...... IV 6 • 39 J e w s ...... V 2 .0 0 L atv ian s...... VI 0.91 T a r t a r s ...... VIT 0 .6 Others ...... VIII 0 .6 5 Portuguese...... IX 0.1 5

The above statistics are not perhaps absolutely correct, since there is no special census to serve as a basis, and in a large number of cases it is difficult to make a clear distinction between the nationalities of the owners of land. In this connection we venture to call the particular attention of the Council to the very special meaning which must be attached to the word “Polish” in describing Polish-speaking Lithuanian citizens. Except for a few more or less recent immigrants from Poland, Polish- speaking Lithuanian citizens are either the descendants of the old Lithuanian families which, long before the establishment of the dynastic union between Lithuania and Poland, constituted the “Baioria” or national Lithuanian aristocracy, or they are the descendants of a very distinct class of Lithuanian society made up of Lithuanian peasants, whom historical conditions, due in particular to Russian rule, led to adopt a certain measure of Polish culture. Nevertheless, from the Lithuanian point of view, the percentage and number of persons actually affected by the provisions of the Law on Agrarian Reform cannot be regarded as determin­ ing the question whether this law is or is not contrary to the Minorities Declaration of May 12th — 9 —

IQ'22. In the first sentence of Article V of the Declaration, reference is made to the equal securit v in law and in fact enjoyed by all Lithuanian nationals ; the second sentence, however, shows that this article is only referring to the right to maintain, manage and control charitable, religious and social institutions, etc. Article IV, paragraph i, of the Declaration provides that all Lithuanian nationals shall be equal before the law, and that persons belonging to racial, linguistic or religious minorities shall enjoy the same civil and political rights as persons belonging to the majoritv. The provisions of the Agrarian Law are similarly applied to all Lithuanian nationals without any distinction, no privilege being granted nor exception made in favour of the majority. If the Minorities Declaration were to be interpreted and explained in the sense given to it by the “exiles”, it would be found that Lithuanian legislators would have been bound, not only to ensure that the law to be framed did not contain any exceptional provisions applying only to minorities in general or to a single one among them, but also to calculate, before voting this law, what percentage of the persons Who might be affected by the provisions of the law belonged to racial, religious or linguistic minorities. If such an interpretation had been given to the equality of all Lithuanian nationals before the law, as proclaimed by the Minorities Declaration. the Lithuanian Parliament would have been unable to vote a single law for the regulation of commerce, since more than 50 per cent, of the persons in Lithuania actually affected bv the provisions of such a law belong to the Jewish minority. The petitioners make no mention of the fact that Lithuanian nationals belonging to the Polish minority receive exactly the same treatment as the majority in the distribution of land made in execution of the Agrarian Reform Law. In a locality where a large Iand-owner belong­ ing to the Polish minority has not managed to apply improved methods of cultivation to his scattered land and has only contributed a very inadequate share towards the economic recovery of the country (which has been greatly impoverished by the war), several dozens of small owners, they, too, members of the Polish minority, are in many cases now established to the great advantage of the State. Before the application of the Agrarian Reform Law, some of these new owners did not possess sufficient land for their needs, while others were without any land at all, and, in order to live, were forced to work as day-labourers under the big owners. The economic power of the Polish or polonised element in Lithuania, far from having diminished, lias notably increased since the putting into practice of agrarian reform. In one of the southern districts we find that out of a total of 1,169 new farmers who were lately without any land at all. 284 are members of the Polish minority, and out of 1,655 owners whose land has increased in quantity by reason of the reform, 481 speak Polish. In another district, out of a total of 2,000 new agri­ culturists, we find 350 either Polish or polonised ; in a third district 120 of the same class of persons who speak Polish, etc. When the Lipkiskiai estate was divided up, land was given to three of these polonised citizens ; one of them, Rumsevitch, was a Polish minority candidate for Parlia­ ment. On the parcelling-out of another estate, Antoniskiai, four polonised citizens received land; on the Linkoniai estate, seven; at Pakalniskiai, two; etc. On the occasion of the dividing up of the estate of Keizoniai, 72 Polish-speaking people were allotted land. A careful examination of the application and operation of the Law on Agrarian Reform would reveal the perfect tolerance which the Lithuanian Government has shown on this occasion, as on all others, towards the Polish minority. The Agrarian Law itself laid down that a considerable number of large estates should not be parcelled out on condition that the holders undertook to apply improved methods of working the land. 37.27 per cent of these model farms were given to Poles, although the Poles only represent 3.18 per cent of the whole population ; 11.4 per cent of this class of land was left in the hands of Germans ; 7.07 per cent with Russians ; 3.5 per cent with Danes, etc. 2. The petitioners assert in their memorandum that the provisions of Article i(f) of the Law on Agrarian Reform, granting the right to expropriate land without compensation from owners who served in the armies of Bermondt and Virgolitchand in the Polish armies, or who worked against fhe independence of Lithuania, are contrary to Article IV of the Minorities Declaration, dated May 12 th, 1922. This assertion is devoid of all foundation. It is not only the right, but the duty of the Lithuanian State, as ni any other State, to piotect its independence, and to take such measures for this purpose as it considers indispensable. In its unaided progress towards reconstruction along a road strewn with obstacles a road, too, on which much Lithuanian blood has been shed — our has been threatened on two occasions, not to mention the Bolshevik invasion, by attempts directed against its existence. One of these attempts, which was speedily suppressed, was made by Russo-German monarchist forces undei the command of Bermondt and Virgolitch, which sought to re-incorporate Lithuania in the . The other was made by Poland, which, although also occupied in re-constituting herscll as an independent State, nevertheless took advantage of her numerical superiority to invade a large area of Lithuanian territory, including the ancient capital of Vilna. 1 his same Poland, who has never yet given de jure recognition to Lithuania, has done everything in her power to destroy the independence of this country. It should be recalled in this connection that this attempt of Poland, in which a number of Lithuanian land-owners were directly concerned, received substantia assistance from the revenue of large estates belonging to these Lithuanian landlords who had emigrated and were engaging in an undertaking against their own country. Article i(t-) of the Law provides that estates belonging to these persons should be expropriated for the benefit <>f tin whole nation. This is a penal measure applying equally to all Lithuanian nationals without distinction of race, religion or language. The Lithuanian Government is applying this provision ni the Law with extreme care and avoiding anything that might possibly bo interpreted as being in the nature of political reprisal?. — 1 0 —

Thus it has only been applied to twelve persons, ten of whom are Poles and two Germans, and the consequent expropriations only amount to 2,937 hectares. It might be well to acquaint the Council with the reasons for the expropriation of the ten Poles. For the sake of brevity we will restrict ourselves to the most important examples. Sentence involving expropriation was passed upon:

(1) Meysztowicz (643 hectares), who, after the occupation of the Lithuanian capital of Vilna by General Zeligowski’s troops, offered his services to Poland, was placed at the head of the Polish occupying authorities established by the General, organised mock elections to the Vilna Diet and did his utmost to annex this Lithuanian district to Poland ; (2) Zan (415 hectares), who also fled to Poland and organised a military expedition against Lithuania, which, to use his own expression, was to “sweep the Lithuanian Government from Kowno with an iron broom and simply annex Lithuania to Poland” ; (3) Stodolkiewicz (180 hectares), who, after organising detachments of Polish volunteers, attacked Lithuanian advanced posts and had a Lithuanian officer, Grebliauskas, shot ; etc.

3. In their memorandum of June 1st, 1924, the Polish “Exiles” analysed the Lithuanian legislative provisions with regard to the compensation which, according to the laws, ought to be paid to owners who had had part of their land taken for the requirements of agrarian reform. They have succeeded in creating as many as five classes of Lithuanian nationals, each of which is differently treated by Lithuanian law, whereas the Minorities Declaration proclaims the equality of all Lithuanians before the law. If the Committee of “Exiles” had troubled to read the Minorities Declaration carefully, they would have seen that it applies only to racial, religious and linguistic minorities, but not to the social minority consisting of the large land-owners, to whom the provisions of the law apply without distinction of race, religion or language. Paragraph 21 of the Lithuanian Constitution declares in effect that : The right of ownership is guaranteed ; the property of citizens cannot be expropriated by legislative means except for purposes of public utility. The Lithuanian Law on Agrarian Reform also recognises the principles of compensation to be paid for land taken for purposes of agrarian reform in Lithuania. Nevertheless, the rates fixed in the law and expressed in German paper marks cannot be applied under the present conditions, in view of (1) the depreciation of that money and (2) the issue of a Lithuanian national currency. This question will be shortly settled in the Lithuanian Parliament by means of a new law, which will be more in conformity with present conditions, and the petitioners’ complaints under this head are, to say the least of it, premature. 4. If the Council of the League of Nations desired, the Lithuanian Government could submit a table comparing the laws and regulations in regard to agrarian reform in Lithuania with those of the other States Members of the League, and signatories either of a or a Minorities Declaration. The Lithuanian Government ventures to think that such a comparison of texts would be favourable to Lithuania. Summarising what has been said above, the Lithuanian Government is able to state that the Lithuanian Agrarian Law contains nothing either in its text or in its executive regulations which can be regarded as contrary to the international undertaking given by Lithuania with regard to the racial, religious or linguistic minorities inhabiting her territory. Note. — The legal provisions governing expropriation without compensation are attached to the present memorandum. (Annex 8.)

(Signed) V. S idzikauskas , Lithuanian Delegate to the League of Nations, Lithuanian Minister at Berlin. — II —

Annex 5.

fTranslation of a French translation.)

F rom t h e M i n i s t e r o f P u b l ic I n s t r u c t io n o f t h e L it h u a n ia n R e p u b l ic to t h e D ir e c t o r s o f a l l S e c o n d a r y S c h o o l s in w h ic h I n s t r u c t io n is g iv e n in so m e L a n g u a g e o t h e r t h a n L it h u a n i a n .

Kaunas, January ioth, 1924.

Further to my circular No. 11196 of November 15th, 1923, I hereby establish the syllabus of subjects to be taught in schools where instruction is given in some language other than Lithuanian.

I. Syllabus of subjects taught in the higher primary schools and the “progymnases”, where instruction is given in some language other than Lithuanian.

No. Subjects Number of lessons per week Total 1st cl Ilnd cl. Illrd cl. IVth cl. Number I. Religious Instruction . . . 2 2 2 8 1 2 L ith u a n ia n ...... 6 5 4 4 19 .) ■ Language used for purposes of instruction ...... 6 5 4 4 19 4- German...... —- 4 4 4 12 - 5- History and Sociology. . . 1 2 j 9 3 6. G e o g ra p h v ...... 2 2 2 2 8 7- Mathematics...... 4 4 4 4 1(1 8. Science and Hygiene . . . 3 9 4 — 9- Special s u b je c ts ...... — .> 6 5 10. Physics...... — — 2 2 4 5 11. Latin (for persons not taking Physics and the special subject)...... (5)(5) (j o )5 12. Drawing and graphic draw­ 2 ing • ...... 2 2 2 8 13. Handwriting...... 2 —— - - 2 14- Manual w o r k ...... 2 2 — — 4 15- Physical training...... 2 2 2 s 16. Music and Singing .... 2 2 — — 10 6

Total .... 33 34 34 35 142

1 In Jewish schools three hours may be devoted in each class to religious instruction and Bible study. 2 In the German schools the Teachers’ Committee may, with the approval of the Minister of Public Instruction, substitute for the some other language selected from among the languages usually taught in the schools (in Lithuania). 3 One hour per week shall be devoted to instruction in Sociology in the third and fourth classes. Such hours may be supplementary to those devoted to History, or Sociology may be taught by a special professor. 4 One hour a week shall be devoted to the teaching of Hygiene. I his may be taught cither by the school medical officer or by the science professor. 5 The syllabus of the third and fourth classes includes : Physics, some special subject or Latin, file Teachers' Committee shall, in agreement with the Parents’ Committee, decide which of these subjects is to be taught. Their decision shall be carried into effect after being approved by the Minister of Public Instruction. If the pupils are sufficiently numerous, two groups may be formed with the approval of the Minister of Public Instruction, one to study Physics and the special subject, and the other Latin, the respective courses being given concurrently. 6 Six of these hours weekly shall be devoted to general choir practice by the pupils. — 12 — II. Normal syllabus of subjects taught in grammar schools ( Gymnases) where instruction is given in some language other than Lithuanian.______Number of lessons per week. Total No. Subjects 1st Ilnd Illrd IVth Vth Vlth Vllth VUIth Number cl. cl. cl. cl. cl. cl. cl. cl. i. Religious Instruction . . 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 161 2 Lithuanian...... 6 5 4 4 4 4 5 5 37 3 Language used for pur­ poses of instruction, to­ gether with the general literature of that language 65444444 35 4. G erm an ...... — 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 2 6 2 5. Other foreign language . —- — — — 3 3 3 3 12 3 6. L a tin ...... — — 5 5 5 5 5 5 3° 7. History and Sociology 12332224 194 8. Elements of Philosophy . — — — — ■— — 2 2 4 9. Geography ...... 2 2 2 2 — —- — — 8 10. Mathematics...... 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3° 11. Science and Hygiene . . 2 2 2 3 — -— 2 — 11 5 12. Physics and Cosmography — — — — 3 3 3 3 12 6 13. Drawing ...... 2 2 2 2 2 2 — — 12 14. Handwriting...... 2 —- — — — — — — 2 15. Manual work...... 2 2 — — — — — — 4 16. Physical training .... 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 14 17. Music and Singing . . . 2 2 Singing 14 ‘ T o t a l ..... 33 34 34 35 35 35 35 35 286 1 In Jewish schools three hours per week may be devoted in each class to religious instruction and Bible study. 2 In schools where the instruction is given in German the Teachers’ Committee may, in agree­ ment with the Parents’ Committee, and subject to the approval of the Minister of Public Instruc­ tion, substitute for that language some other foreign language selected from among the foreign languages taught in Lithuanian schools. 3 The other foreign languages to be taught shall be French and English. One of these shall be selected by the Teachers' Committee. In schools where instruction is given in German, another foreign language shall not be compulsory. 4 One hour shall be devoted to the teaching of Sociology in the third and fourth classes and two hours in the eighth class. These lessons may be supplementary to History lessons or be taken by a special professor. 5 One hour per week in the fourth class and two hours in the seventh class shall be devoted to the teaching of Hygiene. Hygiene may be taught either by the medical officer or by the science professor. 6 In the seventh class, one hour shall be devoted to instructionin Cosmography. This subject may be taken by a special professor. 7 Ten hours shall be devoted weekly to genera! choir practice. III. Normal syllabus of subjects taught in grammar schools ( Gymnases) in which instruction is given in some language other than Lithuanian and in which special attention is devoted to mathematics and science. ______Number of lessons per week No. Subjects 1st Ilnd Illrd IVth Vth Vlth Vllth VUIth Total cl. cl. cl. cl. cl. cl. cl. cl. Number 1. Religious Instruction . . 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 161 2. Lithuanian ...... 6 5 4 4 4 4 5 5 37 3. Language used for pur­ poses of instruction, to­ gether with the general literature of that lan­ guage ...... 6 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 35 4. G erm an...... — 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 20 “ 5. Other foreign language — - — — — 3 3 3 3 12 6. History and Sociology 12332224 19 7. Geography ...... 2 2 2 2 — — 2 — 10 8. M athem atics...... 4 4 4 4 5 5 4 5 35 9. P h y sic s ...... — — 2 2 4 4 4 4 20 5 10. Chem istry...... — — — ■— 2 3 — — 5 11. Cosmography...... — — — — — — — 2 2 12. Special subject...... — — 3 3 — — — — 6 13- Science and Hygiene . . 2 2 2 3 — — 3 — 12 14. Drawing and graphic d ra w in g ...... 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 14 15- Handwriting...... 2 — — — — — — — 2 16. Manual work...... 2 2 — — — — — — 2 17. Physical training .... 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 16 18. Music and Singing . . . 2 2 choir 14 ' T o t a l ...... 33 34 34 35 34 35 35 35 2^5 — 13 —

1 In Jewish schools three hours a week may be devoted in each class to religious instruction and Bible study. 2 In schools where the instruction is given in German the Teachers’ Committee may, with the approval of the Minister of Public Instruction, substitute for that language some other foreign language selected from among the foreign languages taught in Lithuanian schools. 3 The second foreign language (English or French) is chosen by the Teachers’ Committee. In schools where the instruction is given in German the second foreign language may be sup­ pressed. 4 One hour a week in classes III and IV and two hours in class VIII shall be devoted to the teaching of Sociology. These lessons may be additional to Historv lessons or be taken by a special professor. 5 In classes V to VIII four hours a week may be devoted to practical work in lieu of two hours of theory. 6 In the IVth and Vllth classes one hour a week will be devoted to the teaching of Hygiene and this subject may be taught either by the medical officer or by the science professor. 7 Ten hours shall be devoted weekly to general choir practice. All schools in which the instruction is given in some language other than Lithuanian shall be required to put these syllabuses into force and shall immediately reorganise the work in the first five classes. As regards classes VI, VII and VIII, the old syllabuses may remain in force during the current half-year ; the total number of lessons to be given in each class shall nevertheless be reduced to the number given in this table. The Teachers’ Committee of the separate schools above mentioned shall, not later than March ist of the current year, furnish the Minister of Public Instruction with plans of work pre­ pared in Lithuanian, indicating the allotment of the subjects taught, the language used for pur­ poses of instruction, and showing how the allotment made by the Minister of Public Instruction might be suitably adjusted to the particular characteristics of pupils belonging to various nationalities. This circular is issued in reply to the correspondence received regarding the application of the new educational plan. (Signed) Dr. L. B is t k a s , Minister of Public Instruction.

L. VOLODKA, Head of Department.

Annex 6.

T h e L it h u a n ia n L a w o n A g r a r ia n R e f o r m .

The Aims of Agrarian Reform. The object of the law on Agrarian Reform is to provide landless agriculturalists and smallholders with land, and to regulate the legal basis of land tenure with a view to creating conditions which will foster agriculture as a whole, especially the cultivation of small and medium-sized holding?, and which will at the same time facilitate the nationalisation of such agricultural resources as can be more effectively exploited and protected by the State than by private individuals.

§ 7- The first estates to be expropriated shall be the largest and most neglected. The property of persons who do not possess more than 150 hectares and who themselves direct the agricultural exploitation thereof shall not be expropriated until all the large landed estates in Lithuania have been divided up and distributed among landless agriculturalists or such as possess a small patch only. § S. Should the bodies, entrusted with carrying out agrarian reform find that, after the promul­ gation of the present law, the cultivation of any property has fallen into neglect, and that such property is in a bad condition, it shall be divided up without regard to the prescribed order of precedence (§7). In such cases the owner may, at the discretion of the bodies carrying out agra­ rian reform, be left in possession of less than the standard area provided for in paragraph 2, and in exceptional cases the whole of the land may be expropriated.

Annex 7.

S c h e m e f o r t h e A p p l ic a t io n o f t h e L a w on A g r a r ia n R e f o r m .

In virtue of paragraph 1 of Article 2 of the Law on tin Organisation of the Authorities entrusted with the Execution of Agrarian Reform, and in virtue of Article 7 of the Law on Agrarian Reform, the Agrarian Reform Office draws up the following plan for the compulsory seizure of land for the purposes of agrarian reform. — r 4 —

§ i- roperty coming under the Law on Agrarian Reform shall be taken for the purposes of that Reform ; nevertheless, in the selection of land for dividing up or for other purposes, due regard shall be paid to the necessity of protecting agricultural interests and of securing the greatest advantage for the State. For this reason: 1. The first land to be expropriated shall be that which belongs to private owners, and is in the worst state of neglect or otherwise kept in bad condition, or contains buildings in a bad state of repair. Owners of the largest estates shall be dealt with first. 2. So long as the property of the largest owners has not been divided up, that of persons not possessing more than 250 hectares — exclusive of stretches of water — at the time of promul­ gation of the Law on Agrarian Reform, shall only be taken in the following cases : (a) If land is required for distribution to persons who possess only a small quantity and are leaving a village to form scattered settlements; (b) If required for the expansion of a town or commune ; (c) When servitudes or grazing rights held by the village and the owner are involved; (d) Where the property includes land taken from the peasants in 1861 and incor­ porated in the estate; (<’) Whenever the owner has relinquished part of his land by deed of division after July 1st, 1920; (/) Whenever a portion of the land on an estate is allowed to lie fallow and the property is neglected after the publication of the Law on Agrarian Reform.

Land shall be taken in such quantity as may be deemed necessary for distribution to persons owning little or no land and to the inhabitants of the neighbouring village, and, in addition, to satisfy other requirements of agrarian reform (the establishment of model farms, municipal requirements, etc.). The Agrarian Reform Office shall determine the area of land to be taken for the purposes of agrarian reform in the various districts, and the date at which the expropriation shall be made.

In taking land the dividing up of self-contained agricultural units shall, so far as possible, be avoided. Whenever an owner possesses several small farm properties, he shall be allowed t» retain that which he chooses himself, and, should the area taken for agrarian reform be not less than that retained by him, the latter may be taken for purposes of agrarian reform — except in the cases provided for in paragraph 1, point 2; this measure may not be applied, however, until the property of persons in the district owning more than 250 hectares has been seized.

8 4- Land exploited by the Government at the time of promulgation of the Law of Agrarian Reform shall be taken first, regardless of the extent of the owner’s property. 1 he owner shall only be allowed to retain the standard area exempt from expropriation. Land which was leased out on April 3rd, 1922, shall also be taken first, if it consists of separate units or is suitable for division into such. § 5- Land held by persons coming under point e, Article 1 of the Law on Agrarian Reform shall be expropriated out of the normal order, regardless of the extent of the owner’s property.

§ b. Land allotted to settlers for purposes of Russianisation shall only be taken if claims are made by the former owners or their direct descendants.

§ 7- Land which is under improved cultivation may be left to the exploitation of the former proprietors, or be handed over to other persons for purposes of special cultivation, on conditions to be fixed by the Agrarian Reform Office. In these cases special contracts must be concluded with the persons entrusted with the exploi­ tation of such land. (Signed J. A leksa, Minister of Agriculture and Public Domains. Annex 8.

Leg a i. P r o v is io n s g o v e r n in g t h e E xpropriation o i- L a n d w it h o u t C ompensation . i. The Law on Agrarian Reform. § i. Point e. Land belonging to persons, or the successors of persons, who have served in the Bermondt or Virgolitch armed deta.chments, or have served or are serving m the Polish army and who have worked or are working against Lithuanian independence ; should their successors but not the proprietors themselves, have taken part in some action hostile to the Lithuanian Republic, such part of the land which, under the laws of succession, would be the property of the above-mentioned successors, shall be taken for purposes of agrarian reform as provided above.

S ho. In estimating the area of land expropriated, only such part as is suitable for agricultural development shall be taken into account. Stretches of water, roads, marshes, peat-bogs, quick­ sands and other lands shall not be taken into account nor shall compensation be given for them. No compensation shall be given for : Property seized under paragraph i, point e; (b) Property confiscated from small peasant proprietors and incorporated in estates up to 1861 ; and (c) The percentage of ground seized for military purposes or liable to be so seized under the law 011 the allocation of land to soldiers, up to 15 per cent in the case of persons owning from 300 to Soo deciatines of land, and up to 30 per cent in the case of those possessing more than 800 deciatines.

Amendments to the Law of April 14th, 1924, on Agrarian Reform.

S 1. Point e. The words “and whom the Agrarian Reform Office shall indicate" are to be added after “Lithuanian independence”. Appeals in this connection against the decisions of the Agrarian Reform Office may be forwarded to the Minister of Agriculture within one month.

3. Law of August y d , 1920, on the Allocation of Land to Soldiers.

4. Law on the Expropriation of forests, Marshes, Stretches of Water and Land acquired on Preferential Terms, dated August 14//;, 19:20. Note. - The French translation^ of the laws referred to in points 3 and 4 were sub mitted to the Council of the League of Nations by the so-called Committee of Polish Exiles at Vilna with their letter of December 6th, 1924. (41/41254/22721.! Geneva, March 12th, 1925.

LEAGUE OF NATIONS

MINORITIES IN LITHUANIA

Position of the Polish Minority in Lithuania.

(See Document C. 149. 1925. I.)

Note by the Secretary-General. In a letter dated March 12th, 1925, the Lithuanian Delegate to the League of Nations commu­ nicated to the Secretary-General Annexes I-IV of the Lithuanian Government’s memorandum regarding the position of the Polish Minority in Lithuania. This memorandum, which was transmitted to the Secretary-General by the Lithuanian Delegate, on March 6th, 1925, was communicated to the Council in Document C. 149.1925. I.

LETTER TO THE SECRETARY-GENERAL FROM THE LITHUANIAN DELEGATE TO THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS.

[Translation.] Geneva, March 12th, 1925.

Sir, With reference to the letter which I had the honour to send you on the 6th inst., I forward to you herewith Annexes I-IV of the Lithuanian Government’s memorandum regarding the position of the Polish minority in Lithuania, and would beg you to be so good as to communicate them to the members of the Council. (Signed) Sidzikauskas, Lithuanian Delegate to the League of Nations.

[Translation.] Annex I.

EXTRACT FROM THE LAW ON PUBLICATIONS, DATED NOVEMBER 13th, 1919.

B. Press. § 10. •— Publications appear either once only or periodically. The following are regarded as periodical publications: newspapers, reviews, collections of original or translated works published in instalments or in volumes bearing the same title and appearing at least twice a year. § 11. ■— Each publication appearing only once must contain the name and address of the printer. All periodical publications must contain the name and address of the printer, and the name and surname of the editor and publisher. § 12. — Editors and publishers of all periodical publications shall be bound, fifteen days before the publication of the first number, to submit to the head of the district and town, or to the head of the district, a declaration indicating the place where the publication is to appear, its title and general tenor, the name and address of the publisher and editor and the address of the printer. § 13. — The only persons who may be responsible editors of periodical publications are Lithuanian nationals whose civil rights have not been restricted by a judgment of a Court and who have not been sentenced for theft or for any other similar offence affecting their honour. § 14. — If, in accordance with Article 12, the aforementioned declaration is submitted in any given case by the publisher who is not the responsible editor, it must be accompanied by a declaration signed by the responsible editor to the effect that he takes responsibility as editor and that he is not debarred by paragraph 13 from assuming these functions. Note. — A newspaper may have several responsible editors if each section of the paperis headed by the name and title of the editor responsible. § 15. -— Any change as regards the publisher of a newspaper (see paragraphs 12 and 13) must be notified to the competent authorities. § 16. — Publishers and editors of periodicals which regularly appeared before the promulga­ tion of the present law shall be bound within 7 days from the date of promulgation to comply with the stipulations contained in paragraphs 12 and 14. If conditions are attached to publication which are at variance with the stipulations (paragraph 13 and others) of the present Law, a time­ limit of one month as from the date of promulgation of this Law shall be granted in order that the conditions required by the Law may be fulfilled. § 17. —• Any periodicals which are published before the necessary declaration has been submitted (paragraphs 12, 14 and 16) shall immediately be confiscated and the editor, publisher and printer punished by fines of not less than 1,000 and not exceeding 5,000 marks each, or, in case of non-payment, with imprisonment for a period of from one to three months. § 18. —• If a declaration does not contain all the information required under paragraphs 12 to 14, the head of the district and town, or the head of the district, shall, not later than three days after having received the declaration, notify the sender in what particulars it is incomplete and must grant him a time-limit of 7 days in which to submit the requisite information. The publica­ tion of any periodical in respect of which the requisite information has not been given shall b_ punished as set forth in paragraph 17. § 19. —• Any proceedings in respect of offences provided for under the Penal Code and for offences against the Provisional of the Lithuanian State shall be instituted by the heads of the districts and towns, or by the heads of the districts, and by a Public Prosecutor of the Republic. If the case is to be tried by a district Court, the head of the district shall bi- authorised, when bringing the case before the Court, to suspend the circulation of the periodical and the printing of any further numbers. Such an order of suspension must be executed forthwith, but it must at the same time be communicated by the Public Prosecutor of the Republic to the district Court, which shall confirm or cancel it. The circulation and printing of any periodical the edit : of which does not fulfil the conditions laid down in paragraph 13 of the present Law, shall also b_- suspended. § 20. —■ No particulars of the judicial enquiry or evidence of the offence may be published in the press before judgment has been passed or the case dismissed by the Court. § 21. — If a case is tried by the Court in camera, it shall not be permissible to publish in the press anything but the verdict of the Court and any circumstances which the President of the Court trying the case may consider suitable for publications. § 22. —■ The Minister of the Interior shall have the right to forbid the importation from abroad and the circulation in Lithuania of publications hostile to the establishment of the independent State of Lithuania. § 23. — Heads of districts, or heads of districts and towns, who institute proceedings m respect of the printing and circulation of publications which by their tenor or form are prejudicial to morality (pornographic publications, etc.) shall confiscate such publications and keep then: until the Court trying the case has given its verdict. § 24. —■ Any subjects which it is forbidden to discuss in the press by reason of a state of wa : shall be specified by means of special laws. § 25. —• The Russian press laws which are contained in Volume XV of the Legal Code and which are still in force in Lithuania shall be abrogated by the present Lawn Of the articles of the Penal Code relating to the press only those shall remain in force which do not conflict with the present Law or the Provisional Constitutional Law of Lithuania. Note. — The present Law shall not affect the general laws regarding commerce and industry.

(Signed) A. S m e t o x a , President of the Republic.

G alvaxavskas , Prime Minister. Kovno, November 30th, 1919.

[Translation.] Annex II.

EXTRACT FROM THE LAW ON THE SPECIAL DEFENCE OF THE STATE ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF STATE, AFTER THE THIRD READING, ON MARCH 5th, 1910.

§ I. — The Bureau of the Council of State shall be authorised to proclaim “a state of war" in any district of Lithuania, or in certain specified parts of a district, in time of war or of danger to public order. In time of war the Commander-in-Chief of the army, when appointed, shall proclaim “a state of war” in areas where military operations are to take place. The following measures shall be taken to provide for public order during “a state of war’d § 2. — The Minister for National Defence shall appoint a Military Commandant in areas where "a state of war” has been proclaimed. § 3. — The proclamation of “a state of- w ar” shall be officially announced to the publie. The “state of war” shall begin, in the larger towns, on the day of proclamation, and, in the smaller towns and villages, two days after proclamation. § 8. —■ In areas where "a state of war” has been proclaimed, the Military Commandant shall be authorised : (1) to deport to another district any persons whose presence is dangerous to public order or to the army ; (2) to forbid any persons who may be useful tor the maintenance of public order to leave the district ; (3) to order general or special requisitions to be made in conformity with special instructions issued for that purpose : (4) to forbid the purchase, sale, expert or import of any material, foodstuffs or fodder in certain specified areas. § 9- ' ' The Military Commandant shall be authorised to publish notices, possessing legal force, regarding the details of the application of the present law, and may, in the case of non- compliance with these notices, impose fines not exceeding 10,000 marks, or imprisonment not exceeding three months, or may inflict both penalties for the same offence. § 12. — The Military Commandant shall be authorised, if he thinks fit, to suspend, tempora­ rily or for the duration of the “state of war”, all newspapers and other publications. § 16. — Complaints in regard to illegal acts committed by Military Commandants or Com­ manders of the Army in the field shall be submitted to the Ministry of National Defence ; orders and decisions of the Military Commandants may be modified or cancelled by the Minister for National Defence or by the Commander-in-Chief of the army. § 17. — All orders and decisions of the Military Commandant shall be communicated forth­ with to the Minister for National Defence. (Signed) J. Staugaitis, St. Silingas, Bureau of the Council of State.

A. Stulginskis, Deputy Prime Minister, Minister of the Interior.

[Translation.] Annex III.

NOTICE.

In conformity with paragraph 9 of the Law on the Special Defence of the State, I hereby notify all the inhabitants of the town and district of Kovno that any person guilty of disseminating, either by word of mouth or through the press, false news, or news likely to create unrest among the population, shall be regarded as a person dangerous to public order and shall be punished by being sent to a concentration camp. Organs of the press committing such an offence shall be suspended or their editors subjected to a fine not exceeding 10,000 auksinas (marks).

(Signed) Captain M a c iv l a it is , October n th , 1921. Military Commandant of Kovno.

[Translation.] Annex IV.

NOTICE.

With reference to my Notice dated October nth, 1921, I hereby notify all the inhabitants of the town and district of Kovno that the responsible editors of newspapers and other publications, or their publishers, shall be punished by a fine not exceeding 5,000 litas, or by imprisonment for a period not exceeding 3 months, for the following offences: 1. Inciting the public to mistrust the and the Government. 2. Spreading libels against the authorities with a view to impairing their prestige. 3. A general tendency in their publications to undermine the order established bv the Republic. (Signed) Major B razivlevicius , Military Commandant oj the Town and District of Kovno. December 20th, 1922