w

1

\

THE UKRAINIAN PROBLEMS.

No. 6.

UKRfllNfl AND THE PEACE-
CONFERENCE.

1919

tsi

U&

9973

jl*. ^ *?

Ukraina and the Peace- Confe-
rence.

By Professor Stanislaus Dnistrianskyj, Ll.-D.

I. The Right of Self- Determination of

Peoples.

Important and difficult problems are put before
the Peace Conference of the Allied Powers. There
is urgent need of establishing a new system of the
world on the ruins of old ones, broken down by the
war. The first task must be to bring a general and
permanent peace to the peoples stirred up by the
Great War, and it is obvious that this object cannot
be secured by merely proclaiming the ideas of "right
and justice" and the principle of self-determination
of peoples, but those ideas and that principle will
have to be realized, to lead the peoples of the
universe into the peaceful paths of order and of
pacific and orderly international traffic. Even the
idea of a genuine League of Nations can only be
accomplished, if provision is made that all peoples,
who as members of the League of Nations must on
principle enjoy the same rights, shall obtain equal
rights, and no people shall be ruled by another
people or dependent on another people's mercy.

Without solving and actually carrying through
the problems, which helped to bring about the Great
War, permanent peace is an impossible thing.

From the defeat of Imperialism and Militarism all
consequences must be drawn, and an order must be
established, which shall raise the nations again on
the basis of genuine democracy, liberty, and national
independence. Though the catehword of "Self-deter-
mination of Peoples" was coined only during the
war, the problem itself was not new, on the contrary,
it had been alive already before the war and was
the fundamental idea, which brought about the
Grea: War.

A short glance at the history of the past and
the present century will suffice to convince oneself
of the fact, that the striving of the nations for politi-
cal and cultural emancipation was one of the principal
causes of the Great War.

There is in modern times no closer tie than of
the community of men, which is called a people or
nation. This is the result of a development originating
in the French Revolution. The impulse came from
Rousseau's theory of the sovereignty of the people.

The French Revolution asserted the Rights of
Man and put all men of all ranks and classes on an
equality with each other. This feeling of equality and
harmony brought the elements of the nations nearer
to each other and the consciousness of national
kinship arose among them. This was followed by
endeavours at the political union of the national
elements and with this is connected the tendency
towards the formation of national states.

The coherent national elements that, by the prin-
ciple of state-formation then in force, had been dis-
membered into several states, united at last and were
joined into a national union. Thus in the course of
the nineteenth century the German Empire and the
Kingdom of Italy took birth.

Not all nations, however, were allowed, by the
formation of national states to attain the ideal of national
union. Nor was this ideal altogether attained in all
national states, as for instance large portions of the
German nation were left outside the German Empire
in the frame of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy, while
on the other hand the Germans, by the annexation
of French and Polish territories, incorporated large
heterogeneous elements in their political organism.

It is universally known, to what extent the an-
nexation by the Germans of heterogeneous national
territories called forth the Great War.

In other states, where several peoples lived to-
gether, who did not form independent communities,
the nations could not immediately rend asunder the
political organisms. Here the idea of nationalism
lead to fights for national freedom, first of all on the
Balkan Peninsula.

It is to the idea of nationalism that Greece,
Servia and Bulgaria owe their birth.

At the Berlin Congress, however, the national
Balkan problems were not thoroughly solved. On the
one hand the new states did not obtain all their
national territories, for rather considerable national
territories, that ought to belong to them, were left
with Turkey; on the other hand territories were

i*

assigned to the new states, which by nationality were
connected with other political organisms.

Furthermore taking into consideration, that it was
not full independence, that was granted to the Balkan
States at the Berlin Congress, but that they got into
a great dependency on the neighbouring states, it is
obvious how the Balkan Peninsula came to be the
hotbed of incessant combat among the nations, and
that the neighbouring great powers made the Balkan
Peninsula the theatre of their wrestling for hegemony.
Nor could, the Bucharest Treaty bring an adjustment
of the national conflict, since it disregarded the ethno-
graphical boundaries of the national territories. Thus
a gulf, not to be bridged over, opened between the
Bulgarians and the Servians, and that is why in the
Great War we see Bulgaria on the side of the
Central Powers.

That the Balkan Question gave the first impulse
to the Great War is a fact universally known.

Surveying the development of the national problem
in the other states of Europe, we come in short to
the following results:

In Russia, before the war, Tsarism kept down
the numerous nationalities by strong measures, in
other states, where several nations lived side by side,
efforts were made some way or other to do justice
to the national problem.

It could be made no secret that the idea of na-
tionalism, which in the course of the nineteenth cen-
tury had led to the formation of new states, would
exercise great influence on all other nations. In the
meanwhile the nations tried to obtain such political

power in the states, as was to warrant political
independence to their own nationality within the frame
of strange political organisms. To comply with their
endeavours modern states (setting Tsaristic Russia
aside) have taken two ways.

In Belgium as well as in Switzerland the demo-
cratic endeavours of the nations were met by the
concession of extensive political liberties and the
recognition of the equality of all nations, so there
arose no need to split up the sovereignty of the
state according to national territories. Nevertheless
Belgium, owing to the imperfect equalization of the
Flemish language with the French language of the
Walloons, could not be spared vehement political
combats, carried on for many years between both
nations of the country, which created a deep anta-
gonism between them.

Another way was chosen by Austria. Here the
principle of equality of rights was expressly establi-
shed by the constitution, but was turned into the
reverse on being carried out. The empire was not
divided according to national territories, but according
to provinces, and in the provinces the nations, who
were in the minority, were delivered up to other na-
tions, who often had only a chance majority. So an
antagonism arose on the one hand between the imperial
government and the province governments, the majority
nations trying to shake off the remaining part of
their dependency on the supreme power of the state,
and on the other hand an antagonism between the
nations, the minorities endeavouring to free them-
selves from the rule of the majority nations.

In consequence whereof a conflict "was kindled
among the nations of Austria, which affected the
whole state machinery.

When the Great War broke out, indeed all
nations of Austria were forced to fight on the side
of the Central Powers, but it was obvious a priori,
that each nation was aiming at her own deliverance
and that the nations had gone to the war for their
own right of self-determination.

So there can be no doubt, that the main fact
that called forth the Great War was, that the problem
of nationality had to choose this way of being
brought to a definite solution. The re-annexation
of Alsace-Lorraine, the independence of the "small
nations", the restitution of Poland, — these are the
forms, in which the problem of the deliverance of
nations made its first appearance in the war; soon
other national questions followed, such as the Czecho-
slovak, the Yugoslav, the Ukrainian questions etc.,
and when in consequence of the events of war Russian
Tsarism with its "jail of nations" collapsed, the
Russian revolution proclaimed the Rights of the
People and first of all the right of self-determination
of peoples. It was not by mere chance that President
Wilson made Self-determination of Peoples a point
of his programme and that it was agreed to by all
Allied Powers.

So the question is: On what principles is the
Peace Conference to act, to secure self-determination
to the peoples?

Self-determination of the Peoples is no arbitrary
conception, but has sprung from the long combats

of modern nations, and was given sanction to by
the Great War through the defeat of Imperialism.

Self-determination belongs to the nature of modern
peoples. To decide upon the principles of this right
of self-determination one must first make up one's
mind, as to what has to be the condition of a com-
munity to become the subject of self-determination,
in short, what is the nature of a people or a nation
in a modern sense of the word, which preliminary
conditions are required to make it partake of national
self-determination ?

On the definition and the political importance
of the idea of the People a large literature has arisen,
which shows distinct traits of the political currents
of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. In the same
measure as those currents changed, the relation
between state and people was subject to ever varying
criticism, so pre-war political science gives us no
conclusive judgement of their relation, but represents
the picture of a chaos, making arbitrary distinctions
without regarding the natural development of things.
Although it was evident, for instance, that there are
different peoples in one state, some scholars did not
shrink from representing the whole population of a
country as one people in a technical sense of the
term ; or to obscure the true, natural relation between
people and state, a distinction was made between
people and nation, nation being represented as some-
thing higher, having no immediate connection with
the formation of states, while people, being some-
thing lower, purely ethical, was to subject itself to
the state at all risks.

To justify further inequalities a distinction was
created between "historical" and merely "ethnical"
peoples, as though , not all peoples were historical
and ethnical at the same time.

All those scholastical distinctions were tho-
roughly thrown over by the war. Into the fight the
peoples entered as such without caring much, whether
by others they were considered to be peoples or
nations, historical or ethnical peoples (e. g. the
Roumanians and the Yugoslavs in Hungary). On the
contrary, the protection of the so-called "small nations"
was one of the most important problems of the War
of the World.

Nowadays in politics nation and people, whether
big or small, are identical terms, since they have
shaken off all the attributes arbitrarily assigned
to them.

A people or nation is a larger community of men,
based on common descent, but beyond that a cultural
union, created by manners and customs, by common
historical traditions, and as far as possible by common
language as well as by historical connexion with a
certain territory.

On further examination of the nature of modern
peoples the following points must be taken into
consideration : Each people is the result of a historical
process in which two main factors, nature and culture,
are perceptible. First the individuals connected by
descent join into closer unions, which are called
tribes, and the tribes afterwards unite into a large
ethnical unit, that forms a people, the tribes devel-
oping vigorously by mutual interbreeding and by
perpetual absorption of new elements of culture. This

process is in general the product of an assimilation
of the two main factors : nature (descent) and culture.
The importance of descent in this process is proved
by the results of scientific research, different anthro-
pological characteristics often being found in different
peoples. But since peculiar cultural features, too, are
part of the nature of a people, anthropolical diffe-
rences must not be acquiesced in. Each people has
a culture of its own and a history of its own, distin-
guishing it from other peoples.

But there is a third factor to be considered : To
become a real unit, notwithstanding the right of the
individual to move about and the influence of different
civilizations, a people must have a firmly established
basis, fit to secure them a firm and stable position
in life. This substantial basis is the territory. A com-
munity of men can only become a people, if they
have an abode of their own, their own territory.
Single individuals or families indeed can live outside
the territory of their own people, but this is only
an exception that does not affect the rule. Besides,
such individuals and families remain in an ideal
connexion with their national territory, and these
ties can only be undone by their assimilation to
another people.

But how far does the national territory extend?
Without an exact answer to this question the problem
of self-determination of peoples cannot be solved.

First of all it is quite certain that a fundamental
distinction must be made between the territory of a
state and the territory of a people. Seldom the terri-
tory of a state and the territory of a people will
coincide. State territories have frontiers settled by

10

constitutional law, while the frontiers of the territories
of peoples have not yet been recognized by consti-
tutional law.

The essential difference between the territory of
a people and the territory of a state is, that the
latter is based on conquest, while the territory of a
people is formed irrespective of conquest, not by
arbitrary action, but by nature and civilization. Though
in general it may be true, that the historical origin
of all formations of peoples can be traced back to
conquest, yet there can be no doubt, that it is not
merely be conquest that they have become peoples
in a modern sense of the word. Where the native
population did not abandon their primary settlements
and the conquerors were not able, by a definite
process of assimilation, to transform the native
population into a nationality common with the con-
querors (which in earlier centuries was the case in
Italy and in England, in modern times in America),
conquest by foreign powers cannot forthwith involve
annihilation of nationality to a people.

The territory, which a people is historically con-
nected with by perpetual settlement, is the national
territory of a people. The notion of a national
territory in this sense of the word, however, is of an
exclusive nature: Never can a territory be the national
territory of two or more peoples at the same time,
but each people has its own separate national terri-
tory, while in other national territories it plays the
part of a conqueror or of a stranger. Therefore these
peoples, who have subjected other peoples to their
rule but have not been able to permanently settle
in their place and to entirely assimilate them, must

11

not claim the territory of the conquered people as
their own national territory.

Hereat the following observations are to be
made: As it is a question of accomplished perma-
nent settlement, national territory under modern cir-
cumstances, especially considering the great mobility
of trade and industry, depends more on the character
of the country population than of the town population.
Larger towns therefore are, properly speaking, ex-
territorial as regards nationality by the incessant influx
of foreigners and penniless persons. Owing to modern
commercial intercourse even landed-proprietors in
towns cannot be compared to landed-proprietors in
the country, estates in towns very often changing
hands and seldom involving the residency of the
proprietors. For the nationality of a territory, there-
fore, the country population is more decisive than
the population of the towns.

On the other hand there are also within a co-
herent national territory small foreign- national islands,
where another nationality has its home.

But neither by the foreign-national population
of single towns nor by interspersed foreign-national
islands can the character of a coherent national terri-
tory be made doubtful. The sea does not cease to
be the sea for the islands which are in it. The enti-
reness of the national territory must be maintained,
because only such territories can be considered as
separate units, based on constitutional law.

Only national territories in this sense of the term
can form political organisms of their own. Single
towns or islands cannot be torn out of the organism
and incorporated into other national states. The

12

territory principle can only be applied to national
territories in the above sense.

So the national territory is identical with the
coherent ethnographical territory of a people,
including also single foreign-national places on islands.
It is based on the ethnographical principle.

Concerning self-determination of the peoples we
come to the conclusion, that peoples can lay claim
to an existence as independent states only on their
national territory, established on the ethnographical
principle. To this is opposed the so-called historical
principle, which aims at granting their former state-
territories to peoples, who in former historical periods
united also foreign nations in their political organism,
including the territories of foreign nations. (As for
instance the Poles lay claim to the re-creation of the
old Polish Empire from the Baltic to the Black Sea,
with annexation of Lithuanian, White Russian and
Ukrainian territories.) This principle is utterly incon-
sistent with the idea of self-determination of peoples,
since to some peoples it grants the privilege of ruling
over others, while it excludes others from self-deter-
mination on their own national territories. (Justly,
therefore, President Wilson's formula apportions to
the Poles the undoubtedly Polish territories, i. e. the
territories ethnographically belonging to Poland).

If, therefore, the Peace Conference wishes a just
solution of the national problem, if they will solve it
thoroughly conform with the proper meaning of the
victory gained by the peoples of Europe and America,
they must, on creating new national states and esta-
blishing their frontiers, have regard only for the
national territories of the peoples and in doing so

13

make valid the pure ethnographical principle in the
above sense. By the ethnographical principle all
annexations by foreign peoples are undone, and thus
it is decided for the future, that no people is justified
in enriching itself at another people's expense, and
that no people must strive for the territory of another
people.

So much of the delimitation of the frontiers of
new national states. But it must be observed that the
peoples ought to be at liberty to unite with other
peoples and to establish common political organisms
with them (Such is the case at present in Belgium
and Switzerland, and for the future the Slovenes,
Croats and Servians wish to form a joint Yugoslav
state). But it will not do to refuse those people, who
wish to form independent states on their own national
territories, the right of establishing them. Such pro-
cedure would be entirely inconsistent with the idea
of self-determination.

But since, as was said before, there will actually
never be any territory, that is inhabited by only one
people, also those peoples, who live on the territory
of a foreign nation, must be offered the opportunity
of making the most of self-determination. In this case
the minority nations must indeed, as aforesaid, sub-
ordinate themselves to the territorial sovereignty of
the majority people on its national territory, but what
is not essential to territorial sovereignty, must be left
to the free determination of the minority peoples. The
self-determination of national minorities on the ter-
ritory of a foreign nation is limited only by the
principle, that it is not allowed to be at variance
with the self-determination of the majority people

14

domiciled on that territory, and that they have to
submit to anything that may result from territorial
union.

Speaking in the terms of political science, peoples
on their own national territory are entitled to the
establishment of national states of their own, with all
the consequences resulting from a national state, by
virtue of the territory principle; those peoples,
however, who live on the national territory of a
foreign people as individuals or larger groups in the
places or interspersed 'islands', are entitled to self-
determination by virtue of the personality principle,
to an extent which results from the same.

15

II. The Ukrainian Nation.

Among the European peoples, striving for self-
determination as the necessary consequence of the
Great War, is the Ukrainian people, not, indeed,
one of the "small nations", which the Allied Powers
have taken under their protection since the beginning
of the war, but a great people of 40 million, who
in their time had sacrificed very much for European
civilization as a safeguard against the Mongols,
Turks, and Tartars, but had already lost their inde-
pendence in previous centuries.

Till the present day the Ukrainian people re-
mained under foreign rule, doomed by the Russians
and Poles to annihilation of their nationality, and
forgotten by the rest of the world.

But suppression could not annihilate the living
soul of the great people, and its dismemberment
among several hostile communities could not weaken
the idea of national union. Though excluded from
the European Concert, the Ukrainian people, in South
Russia as well as in Poland, and after the partition
of Poland on the territories of the Austro-Hungarian
Monarchy, never ceased to strive for the attainment
of political autonomy and national independence. When

16

the Great War brought the triumph of the ideas of
democracy, the Ukrainian people, too, applied for the
participation in the European community of nations.
Everybody knows that the Ukrainian troops were
the first to proclaim the revolution in Petrograd. It
is in a large measure due to the Ukrainians, that the
Russian revolution proclaimed self-determination of
the peoples, which the Allied Powers afterwards made
their own device.

It is this great Slav people that those, who ruled
it till the present day, want to deprive of the right
of participating in self-determination.

But the Ukrainian nation actually exists, and
has all the properties necessary for the existence of
a political organism.

But as the political and national enemies of the
Ukrainian people, especially the most influential po-
litical circles among the Russians and the Poles, are
incessantly spreading false and designedly fictitious
information about the world concerning the Ukrainian
people, and do not shrink from the basest means of
calumny, to enrich themselves on the expense of this
people, abundantly blessed with natural resources,
it is necessary sine ira et studio to state the true
facts about Ukraina and the Ukrainian people, and
to furnish proof, that the latter is indeed a nation
in the modern sense of the word, and that according
to the parole of "right and justice" it is to be granted
self-determination on its whole national territory. At
the same time it shall be demonstrated, how much
it will be to the interest of the Allied Powers and
mankind in general, if the Peace Conference will help
Ukraina to political independence.

17

If in Europe and in America, before the War, so
little was known about the Ukrainian people, it must
be attributed to te fact, that both peoples, who ruled
the Ukrainians, wanted to persuade the world, that
there were no Ukrainians, only Poles and Russians,
and that the Ukrainians formed only an individual
tribe of the Polish or the Russian nation.

As for the Poles, in the first place, in all their
political endeavours they always thought of the re-
establishment of the old Polish empire from the Baltic
to the Black Sea. So in all geographical records of
Polish scholars we always find the notion of the
former Polish empire in its largest dimensions, i. e.
including the Lithuanian, White Russian, and Ukrai-
nian territories. When in the nineteenth century with
the rise of the idea of nationalism it became ne-
cessary to pay heed to national differences, and the
Ukrainians asserted their national rights, the Polish
politicians at once defined their position regarding
them, declaring that the Ukrainians from the San to
the Dniepr formed only a part of the Polish nation,
that their language was only a country dialect of the
Polish language, and only their creed and some of
their manners and customs were different from the
Polish. Especially to those Ukrainians, who lived on
the territory of the former Austro-Hungarian Monarchy,
they disputed the right of appearing as an inde-
pendent people, and of asserting their national identity
with the Ukrainians living in Russia : moreover, re-
ferring to the name of "Ruthenians" customary in
Austria, they alleged, that the "Ruthenians" were in-
vented in 1848 by Count Stadion, and they used
all possible means to persuade the world, that the

18

so-called "Ruthenians" were no separate people and
had nothing in common with the Ukrainians living
in Russia under the name of "Little Russians".

Against this assertion it must here already be
observed, that the name of "Ruthenians" is derived
from "Rusj", the original name of the ancient Ukrai-
nian State of Kieff, and by its very etymology proves
the connexion of the Austrian "Ruthenians" with the
Ukrainians living in Russia (for further particulars see
third chapter). On the other hand the description of
the Polish politicians meets with the opposition of
the Russian policy, which also lays claim to the
Ukrainians, and under the official name of "Little
Russians" describes them all as forming an integrant
"part of the Russian nation. To Russian imperalism
all Ukrainians, hence also those, who had ever lived
under Polish rule, appear as Russians and the
Ukrainian language as a Russian dialect.

The Polish theory, which counted the part of
the Ukrainian people, that formerly was under Polish
rule, among the Polish nation, had the only effect,
that many Ukrainian noblemen as well as Ukrainians
belonging to the middle classes and Ukrainian mer-
chants adopted Polish civilization and attached them-
selves to the Poles. But the masses of the Ukrainian
nation remained faithful to their national traditions,
took part in the national rebellions of former cen-
turies against Polish hegemony, and maintained their
national independence against all Polonizing ten-
dencies. When after the partition of Poland East
Galicia came to Austria, a political struggle arose
between the Poles and the Ukrainians on the territory
of the Austrian constitution, at the bottom of which

19

was the idea of emancipation of the Ukrainian people
from Polish hegemony. Although those in power in
Austria delivered up the Ukrainians to the discretion
of the Poles, the Ukrainians used the small fragments
of liberty to make East Galicia and North Bukowina
a national Piedmont for the whole Ukrainian people,
and, in spite of the Russian cordon, to cultivate the
ideal community of interests with their brothers of
Ukraina.

Much more dangerous for the Ukrainians was
the Russian unitarian theory, which was first upheld
by the Russian Tsar Peter the Great. Under his rule
Ukraina lost her separate position and was incorpo-
rated in the Muscovite State of the Tsar. (For particulars
see III. chapter). By him the name of "Rossia" and
the "theory of the union of the Russian nation" were
introduced. According to this theory the Russian
nation consists of three tribes : Great Russians, Little
Russians, and White Russians, whose idioms are
supposed to differ no more from each other than
dialects of one language. Since that time the Ukrai-
nians are officially styled only as "Little Russians".
(Not till half a century after the Union between the
Muscovite state and Ukraina the idea struck Peter
the Great, that the Ukrainians belonged to the same
nation as the Muscovites.) Official Russia declares
urbi et orbi that, all these tribes are connected by a
common, i. e. the Russian, literary language, by race,
customs and tradition. The Ukrainian literature is not
recognized, the Ukrainian history is curtailed and made
an essential part of the Russian history. Hand in
hand with this conception goes the ruthless ruppres-
sion and persecution of every manifestation of the

2*

20

independence of the Ukrainian people: the use of
the Ukrainian language in literature is prohibited and
not even in elementary schools the Ukrainian lan-
guage is allowed. Yet the Ukrainian peasant remains
faithful to his national language and is very strongly
conscious of his national independence against every
Russian. Marriages between Ukrainian peasants and
Russians wellnigh never take place and the Ukrainian
peasants seclude themselves almost entirely from the
Russians.

For all these reasons, and owing to the circum-
stance that into the Ukrainian territory official Russia
deliberately sent Russian officials, dislocated Russian
troops, and provided for the admittance into the
Ukrainian industrial centres (Kieff, Kharkoff, Odessa)
of Russian workmen, the impression forced itself
upon any foreign traveller before the War, that on all
Ukrainian territories (i. e. in South Russia) there lived
only one, the Russian, nation. The great political
importance, which before the War Russia had in
Europe, effected that the world of science and lite-
rature adopted the Russian unitarian theory in the
History, Geography, and Statistics of Eastern Europe
without further investigation, and the consequence
was, that official European political science before the
War did not know, that there is a large country in
Europe, called Ukraina, and that in this country there
lives a separate nation, called the Ukrainians, who
have their own history and are leading their own
national life.

But the great War forthwith brought the enligh-
tenment. Among the first peoples to come forward
after the proclamation by the Russian revolution of

21

the principle of self-determination of peoples was the
Ukrainian people; to those, who iurabant in verba
magisiri, a sudden surprise, to others, however, who
knew the prevarications of Tsaristic theories only the
natural development of things.

But it must really not be concealed from any
scholar, that the Ukrainian is an old people and
that the roots of the development of the Ukrainian
nation are to be found as early in the middle ages
as those of the English, French and German nations.
The only essential difference is that, while the course
of development of the great European nations was
continual and uninterrupted, the development of the
Ukrainian nation was slackened by the immediate
vicinity of Mongols, Tartars and Turks, and was
greatly interrupted by foreign suppression. But the
preliminary conditions necessary for the existence of
a nation are no less to be found with the Ukrainian
nation than with other European nations. But one
has to look truth openly in the face and not to be
mislead by deliberate prevarications.

This refers above all to the two main-factors
of each nation: nature and culture (see chapter I.).

Taking into consideration that peoples come
into existence by the interbreeding of different tribes
as well as by the influence of different spheres of
civilization, no constant anthropological properties,
indeed, can be agreed upon to be characteristic of
all those who belong to a certain people. But when-
ever interbreeding does not often take place and the
influence of foreign civilization is not great, certain
anthropological types spring up, which distinguish
this people on the average from other peoples. So

22

with the peoples of Eastern Europe anthropological
properties can be observed with greater reliableness
than with those of Central or Western Europe, where
cross-breeding is much more complicated, and the
influence of world-civilization is much greater. It is
obvious, however, that where there are considerable
anthropological differences between large groups of
men, if only on the average, those differences are
proof, that the groups of men concerned differ also
from each other as regards their nationality.

Now anthropological research has proved the
following differences between the Ukrainians on one
hand, and the Poles and Russians on the other:

The average height of the Ukrainians amounts to
1670 mm, of the Poles 1654, of the Russians 1657.
The average width round the chest comes to 5504 per.
cent of the size of the body with the Ukrainians, 551 1
per cent with the Poles, and 52i8 per cent with the Rus-
sians. As regards the shape of the skull there is also a
remarkable difference: the average cranial index is
83-2 with the Ukrainians, with the Poles only 821,
and with the Russians 823. A great difference is to
be observed in the facial angle, viz. 78i with the
Ukrainians, 76*3 with the Poles, 767 with the
Russians.

So it is certain that the anthropological type of
the Ukrainians differs essentially from the Russian
and Polish types. This difference as early as in the
eighties of the last century drew the attention of the
famous geographer Reclus, who noticed a closer
kinship of the Ukrainians with the Southern Slavs.

As regards historical descent, too, the Ukrainians
differ from the Poles and the Russians. While the

23

Poles descended from the Western Slav tribes, the
Ukrainians and the Russians branched off from the
Eastern Slavs, the Ukrainians from their Southern
group, the Russians from the Northern one. The
Ukrainians may be traced back to the Polans, Derev-
lans, Siverians, Ulitches and Dulibes, the Russians
to the Radimitches and Viyatitches. Besides, the in-
fluence of Finnish tribes plays an important part
with the Russians, which is not the case at all with
the Ukrainians. According to Deniker's theory the
Ukrainians (as well as the Southern Slavs) belong
to the so-called Adriatic (Dinaric) race, while the
Poles are to be counted among the Vistula race and
the Russians among the Oriental race.

But not only as regards descent the Ukrainians
differ from the Poles and Russians, but they have
also a peculiar national culture of their own, distinct
from both these peoples. The Ukrainian culture is
of an older date than the Polish and Russian cultures,
in the same measure as the history of the Ukrainian
people begins considerably earlier than the history
of the Polish and Russian peoples.

As the most important attribute of a peculiar
national culture appears, as a rule, a peculiar lan-
guage. Yet this is not a necessary condition of na-
tionality. There are individuals and there can be
larger groups of men, who are compelled by external
or other circumstances, or willing of their own accord,
to use another language in their every day life, without
by doing so losing their inherited nationality. A people
as a whole has generally a language of its own ;
but this is a peculiar matter, considering that two
peoples can have the same language as their national

24

tongue (English and Americans, to a certain degree
Servians and Croats), while on the other hand endea-
vours are not wanting to create a political national
union notwithstanding the difference of languages
(Yugoslavs). Still it is of greatest importance for a
nation, if they can plead, that they have a uniform
national language.

Official Russia never recognized the Ukrainian
language, but only let it pass as the "Little Russian
dialect" of the Russian language. Even granting this
assertion to be true, it would not be a sufficient
reason for contesting the Ukrainian people's claim
to national individuality, considering that a peculiar
national language is no necessary property of the
notion of people, and that there are actually languages
of different peoples, differing less from each other
than dialects of one language. But this official theory
is decidedly false. The Ukrainians have a national
language of their own, distinct from the Russian and
Polish languages. Setting aside the views of some
politically tainted philologists (such as Florinskyj and
others), the general opinion of Slav philologists is,
that the Ukrainian language has no nearer affinity
with the Russian or Polish languages than, for in-
stance, the Polish with the Czech, or the Servian
with the Bulgarian. A final decision was given by
the Petrograd Academy of Science in their expert
opinion of 1905, that the Russian and Ukrainian
languages are two independent languages of equal
rank. According to latest philological research (Prof.
Sto ckyj-G artner) the language most closely
connected with the Ukrainian is the Servian and
Croat language.

25

The Ukrainian people has also a literature of
its own, the beginnings of which are of an earlier
date than of the Polish or Russian literatures. The
thousand years of the history of the Ukrainian lite-
rature begin as early as the tenth century, at the
time of the greatest prosperity of the Empire of Kieff.

It is true that all masterworks of Ukrainian
literature of the earliest period of Ukrainian history
are claimed by the Russians as being their own, but
this conception is based on the Russian "unitarian
theory" mentioned above, and is supported by the
false statement, that the early Empire of Kieff was
Russian in its origin (see chapter III.). Among these
masterworks of Ukrainian literature are to be counted
the Chronicle of Nestor, the Galician -Volhynian
Chronicle, the noble historical epic "Slowo o polku
Ihorewi" and many others besides. The language of
these masterworks is chiefly Old Slavonic, but as
early as the eleventh century it shows an ample ad-
mixture of Early Ukrainian elements and a considerable
linguistic difference from the literary documents
written on the Muscovite territory at the same period.

The Ukrainian literature of the early Empire of
Kieff reflected the character of a mighty state. With
the decay of the Empire of Kieff (in the thirteenth
century) also the Ukrainian literature decayed. Half
a thousand years of Tartars' wars and the oppression
by foreign states have drained the life of Ukrainian
literature. But the five centuries of decay of the
Ukrainian literature are at the same time a period
of the greatest development of oral popular poetry,
which, risen neither on Polish nor on Russian
territory, was a peculiar feature, a characteristic

2G

production of the oppressed Ukrainian people. At
the end of the eighteenth century written Ukrainian
literature reappeared. The Ukrainian vernacular lan-
guage revived in works of national literature and in
the course of the nineteenth century the Ukrainian
literature fully developped itself. National poets, such
as Shewtchenko, Fedjkovytch, Frank o,
Stefanyk, Kociubynskyj&c. are among those
who would be an ornament to the greatest literatures
of the world. But it is still more important to point
out, that it is not only by being written in the
Ukrainian vernacular language that the Ukrainian
literature differs from the Russian and Polish, but
that in its character it bears a peculiar stamp, foreign
to the Polish and Russian literatures. While the latter
are literatures of lordly peoples, accustomed to rule
and command, and even after the partition of Poland
thinking of nothing but the restitution of their former
sway, the Ukrainian is the literature of an oppressed
people, living in distress and striving for freedom.
In all spheres of learning, too, brisk activity
is shown by the Ukrainian people about the second
half of the nineteenth century. The Ukrainian people
had long ago to boast of scientific research by
eminent scholars, written in their national lan-
guage, and is now able to refer to a bulky scientific
literature as well as to a selection of eminent learned
works of the two learned societies of Lemberg and
Kieff, organized on the model of European academies
of science. The learned society at Kieff has recently
been given the rank of an Academy of Science. By
all these works the Ukrainian language has proved,
that like any other civilized language it is qualified

27

for the discussion and solution of the most com-
plicated problems of science and learning.

On examining the further cultural phenomena
of the Ukrainian people we get about the following
picture:

In the old Ukrainian state, which commenced
with the foundation of the Empire of Kieff in the
9th century (see chapter III.), civilization was very
high. It was from the vast treasures of it that the
Muscovite state drew later on, and Russia, united
under Peter the Great, ows its cultural position to a
large extent to Ukrainian civilization. The high level
of civilization of the Ukrainian people at that time
is best proved by the compilation of Ukrainian custo-
mary law of the eleventh century, the so-called
"Prawda Ruska". Though the early Empire of Kieff
stood under the strong influence of Byzantium, capital
punishment was abolished in Ukraina as early as
the 10th century, while corporal punishment was
almost unknown. The compilation of law, mentioned
above, already distinguishes crimes committed with
malice aforethought from crimes by passion. For indi-
viduality ample allowance was made. In civil law
the wife enjoyed almost the same rights as her hus-
band, after whose death she by rights took the guar-
dianship of her children. The prince was the supreme
leader of the army. He was supported by a Council
of Boyars. On the prince and the boyars the people
sat in judgment. The election of the prince, if there
was no immediate right of succession, and the de-
cision about war or peace appertained to the assembly
of the people, which was called "Vitche". If the
assembly refused their consent to war, the prince

28

was nevertheless at liberty to take the field, but only
with his followers and the volunteers. In the "Vitche"
any citizen of age had a vote, but the son refrained
from voting in the presence of his father.

At that time the Ukrainians were for the most
part a trading people, which kept up a lively traffic
with all civilized peoples of Europe. Thanks to these
relations the Ukrainian countries very early attained
to a high degree of civilization. As early as the be-
ginning of the eleventh century public schools were
founded and several libraries existed. The princes
were persons of refined education. Prince Wsewolod
of the eleventh century is said to have spoken five
languages. An abundance of documents of civilization
arose in the seclusion of the monasteries of that
time. To the great number of accomplished men
among the educated lay classes numerous precious
documents and works bear eloquent witness.

The Boyars formed the nobility of that time.
The Ukrainian citizens enjoyed very high esteem.
As regards economy the Empire of Kieff was one of
the mightiest of its age. The towns formed the founda-
tion of the cultural, political and social development
of the Ukrainian people, and commercial as well as
other trading interests gave their stamp to the policy
of the Empire of Kieff. Commerce was the vital nerve
of Ukrainian political life. At the wealth of Kieff,
the capital of the Empire, foreigners marvelled. The
peasantry, too, were wealthy: they were free and
enjoyed the same rights as the other classes of society.

But this whole civilization ceased, when Poland,
and afterwards Russia, ruled the Ukrainian territory.
First of all the Polish government brought about the

29

entire ruin of the Ukrainian middle-classes by para-
lyzing trade. Ukrainawas exposed to incessant attacks
of wild nomadic tribes, and as Poland refused to
protect them against these incursions, trade with the
South and East ceased almost entirely. Also the
business-relations of Ukraina with the West were
cut off altogether, the Poles forbidding the passage
to Ukraina to foreign merchants. Nor could inland
trade develop under Polish rule, as the Polish nobility
introduced vere heavy tolls and inland customs on
Ukrainian territory, which had the effect of stifling
any traffic. Besides, the Poles began to colonize the
Ukrainian towns with foreign colonists. First Polish
colonists were called in. But when it appeared that
in their business qualities they were no match to
the Ukrainians: Germans, Armenians and Jews were
employed for the purpose. But when these methods,
too, could not entirely suppress Ukrainian trade, the
Polish government resorted to reprisals and exceptional
measures. Ukrainian merchants and tradesmen were
expelled from the guilds, they were forbidden to
keep workshops and to offer their goods for sale
in towns and on fairs. The Ukrainian citizens were
not allowed to buy houses in the towns. Besides,
Ukrainian tradesmen were forced to pay special taxes
and duties. The contributions, necessary for keeping
the army of invasion, were likewise used to ruin the
Ukrainian middle-classes. At last the Ukrainian middle-
classes were expelled from council and office in
towns and forbidden to send their children to public
schools. With the Ukrainian middle-classes trade and
commerce decayed. But Poland was not able to put
Polish trade on the place of the crushed Ukrainian trade.

30

The Ukrainian nobility, too, was extirpated by
the rule of the Poles. After the union of the Ukrai-
nian territories with Poland the endeavour of Polish
policy was to force the idea of a Polish state upon
the Ukrainian countries. At first it was not easy for
the Poles to prevail upon the Ukrainian nobility to
comply with their policy. Only a few boyar-families,
allured and demoralized by the gay and easy life of
the Polish szlachta, attached themselves to them, left
their church and their people in the course of time,
and turned Roman-Catholic and Polish. A large part
of the Ukrainian nobility, however, was Polonized
only by force and vexation. The Polish kings partly
dispossessed the Ukrainian nobles under the flim-
siest pretexts, to confiscate their property, partly they
illegally gave away the property of Ukrainian nobles
to the Polish szlachta, who attacked them by force
of arms and turned them out of their inherited estates.
The fugitives often applied for assistance to the
Tartars, but by doing so occasioned the intervention
of the Polish government with the Tartars, who for
a high tribute, paid to them by the Poles, pledged
themselves to the latter, to hunt for, and plunder, the
Ukrainian nobility. The property of the killed or
arrested nobles was confiscated for the estates of
the crown. This policy of extirpation towards the
Ukrainian nobility drove a large part of them into
the Russian camp : many of them took refuge behind
the supremacy of Russia.

In Ukraina at first the clergy had the highest
education and influence. But the Ukrainian clergy,
too, had to fall a victim to the despotism of the
Polish nobility. In the beginning the right of filling

31

up vacancies in the bishoprics and clerical livings
of Ukraina was in the hands of the Ukrainian people ;
after the union of Ukraina with Poland the Polish
kings laid claim to this right for themselves.

Dissolute fellows without any theological edu-
cation, who sometimes did not even know the mean-
ing of the word of 'bishop', were appointed heads
of the Ukrainian clerical hierarchy. As archimandrits
in Ukrainian monasteries Polish noblemen appear
under Polish rule, who only economically exploited
the monasteries, and did their best to expose the
Greek rites to ridicule and contempt.. The Ukrainian
lower clergy was systematically depressed as regards
their cultural, economical, and social position, and
reduced to beggary, the churches and convents were
deprived of their property. Thus, among others, the
large estates, with which the Ukrainian princes and
boyars had endowed the bishoprics and convents of
St. Basil in Ukraina, were confiscated for the benefit
of the estates of the crown and the private property
of the Polish nobility, or used for the endowment
of Polish bishoprics, Polish clerical livings, and Jesuit
colleges. Numerous churches were taken from the
Ukrainians by force and given to the Poles, nay,
sold to the Jews. The Roman Catholic priests often
rushed upon the Ukrainian parsons in their resi-
dences, beat them, and collected the compulsory
tithes by force. The Ukrainian clergy (especially in
the seventeenth century) very often makes complaint
that the squires came upon them and forced them to
drudgery and corvee with teams, which the clergy
was not liable to. It is true that in 1669 in the Polish
Diet the Ukrainian clergy was declared free from

32

serfdom and statute labour on the manorial estates,
but this law was ignored as usual. By these perse-
eutions the Ukrainian bishops and the lower clergy
were reduced to such a degree of poverty, that a
higher^ education and theological studies were not to
be thought of. The consequence was, that, according
to the reports of Polish historians, many Ukrainian
churches were leased to Jews. Thus in a memorial of
the thime of Sigismund III it says : "The jew took the
keys of the church and got a payment from each
performance relating to divine service." No wonder,
then, that such oppression drove the Ukrainian people
to despair and was one of the reasons, why under
the hetman Bohdan Chmelnyckyj the whole
Ukrainian people rose to shake off the Polish yoke.
Lastly, concerning the Ukrainian peasantry, the
Polish nobility did not think of extirpating them,
but they endeavoured to enslave them, to make them
a part of the inventory, to dispose of them arbi-
trarily at their discretion. First the peasant was de-
prived of all civil rights which he had enjoyed in
Ukraina, and afterwards he was deprived of all human
rights, too. Everything belonged to the Polish squire.
Not only the ground, which the peasant tilled, and
the cottage he lived in, not only his cattle and his
house-hold utensils and furniture, but also himself
and his whole family. As to how the Polish squire
used his rights, the Polish writer Star o wo 1 s k i
says the followings words among others : "With us
there is freedom for everyone to do as he pleases.
The consequence thereof is that the weak become the
slaves of the strong and rich. In Poland one is allowed
to do anything. Asiatic despots do not torment so

33

many men to death during their life-time, as it is the
case in one year in the free Polish Republic". Even
the famous Polish preacher Skarga, who is known
as an opponent of the Ukrainian people, says: "On
the whole globe no empire can be found, where the
peasantry has to suffer such a treatment as in Poland.
Large landowners and Captains-General of the coun-
ties not only strip the peasant of everything, but also
kill him, when and where they like, without even
hearing a bad word for it". Special renown as an
executioner of Ukrainian peasants was gained by the
Polish prince Jeremias Wisnowiecki, whom Polish
writers relate to have murdered the peasants, to have
had them beheaded, impaled, and their eyes put out
with an anger.

No wonder then, that the formerly flourishing
Ukrainian civilization decayed and could not fit itself
to the requirements of the constant progress of
Western civilization. Nevertheless the Ukrainians kept
the original mental civilization of their people in its
originality to the present day. This peculiar civiliza-
tion of the broad masses of the population very
distinctly separates the Ukrainian people from other
peoples.

The peculiarity of the Ukrainian people shows
itself already in their family-life. The head of the
family exercises no absolute power over the other
members of the family. Likewise the position of
women is considerably higher with the Ukrainian
people than with the Russians or Poles. With the
Ukrainians a daughter is never married off against
her will. Grown-up sons receive a house and soil
from their fathers immediately on being married. With

34

the Russians the father has to decide about the
marriage of his daughter, he is the head of the
collective family, over which he exercises his absolute
authority. This is impossible with the Ukrainians.

With the Ukrainians the inclination for free asso-
ciations is very great. The associations are based
on perfect equality of work as well as of profit.
A foreman is chosen, his commands are obeyed, but
he only gets an equal share in the profit, and works
together with the rest. With the Russians the bolshak
chooses his workmen himself, he does not work, and
yet gets the largest share in the profit. The aptitude
of the Poles for associations is very small.

The Ukrainian community is a voluntary union
of free men for the purpose of security, and promotion
of the good of the commonwealth. Beyond this the
individual will is respected and the members of the
community must not, on principle, be confined in
their private sphere of action. The principle of perfect
freedom of the individual and of the sanctity of pri-
vate property is in power. The "common landed
property" which after Russian model the Russians
have instituted in some places of the left side of
Ukraina, is repugnant to the nature of the Ukrainian
people, and the people openly protests against this
institution. Still more repugnant to the inner mind of
the Ukrainian nation is the Russian "Mir", which under
the pretence of a communist republic subdues the
free will of the individual, all the more since the
manner of thinking of the Ukrainian peasant is based
on the sacredness of his private property and on
true personal freedom. Hence it is only under the
influence of force and of all measures, which aim at

35

the extirpation of the abuses of capitalism and the
hitherto existing order, that Russian bolshevism could
gain prevalence here and there in Ukraina, owing to
the present misconstruction of its nature. But this
influence is sure to cease, as soon as the violent
measures of bolshevism will cease, since bolshevism,
which has sprung from the inner mind of the Russian
people, can not be reconciled with the Ukrainians,
way of thinking at all (see chapter III.).

The Ukrainian peasant's forms of social inter-
course are quite different from the rude manners of
the Polish or Russian peasant. Great delicacy of
feeling, courtesy and civility towards other people,
and disinterested hospitality, are the chief features
of the Ukrainian peasant's etiquette.

But the world of Ukrainian civilization appears
in its highest perfection in the oral popular literature.
The philosophical mind of the Ukrainian people
finds its expression in an almost countless number
of proverbs, parables &c, the like of which we
hardly find with the most civilized European nations.
The highest degree of perfection is attained by
Ukrainian popular poetry. Neither Russian nor Polish
popular poetry can be compared to Ukrainian poetry
concerning their poetical qualities. In Ukrainian
poetry there is a large feeling, a lively appreciation
for nature, everywhere we find the glorification of
the highest and purest feelings of the human soul.
In love songs no trace of sexualism can be found,
not the bodily beauty of woman, but her moral
beauty are glorified in Ukrainian popular poetry,
everywhere with full perfection of form, and harmony
between form and subject. Russian popular poetry

3*

36

is much poorer and entirely different. Polish popular
poetry is insignificant.

Hand in hand with Ukrainian popular poetry
goes the Ukrainian popular song and the Ukrainian
popular art. The scholar cannot fail to notice the
essential differences between Ukrainian popular songs
on one hand and Polish or Russian popular songs
on the other. The Ukrainian popular song is un-
doubtedly among the finest of the globe. In their
music the whole character of the Ukrainian soul is
expressed, hence to an Ukrainian musician it is no
mystery, why the music of the ingenious composer
Tschajkowsky differs so much from the music
of the other Russian composers, since Tschajkowsky
is of Ukrainian extraction, be it ever so often assured
that he called himself a Russian. The Ukrainian
popular art, too, is entirely original and of a higher
perfection than with the Poles or Russians. Wood-
carving with the Huculs has attained to a high degree
of artistic development. But the highest prize must
be awarded to Ukrainian ornamentation. In embroi-
deries, tissues and beads-needlework we see a blending
of colours so aesthetic, that though each colour is
gaudy in itself, the effect of the whole is harmonious,
and artistic. Russian ornamentation is much lower in
value, of a different character, and based on different
principles. Polish popular ornamentation is much
inferior to Ukrainian, where it is not merely an
imitation of it.

This short statement proves that Ukrainian
civilization has indeed all preliminary conditions,
which are indispensable for an independent nation.
It must only be given the possibility, by being

37

admitted into the community of other nations, once
more to attain to that level, which, in comparison
with European civilization of that time, it had attained
once in its historical development. For this purpose
the Ukrainian people must get back its political
independence which it had at that time.

That it is worthy of such independence will be
shown by the further arguments. (Chapters III — V.)

39

III. The Ukrainian History.

Though the Ukrainian people was for several
centuries of its history under Polish and Russian rule,
there can be no doubt, that the Ukrainians have a
history of their own, and that their historical traditions
are of a type entirely different from those of the
Poles or Russians.

Long before the beginning of the Polish and
Muscovite states the Southern group of the Eastern
Slav tribes founded the State of Kieff, the first state-
formation of the people, that to-day is known under
the name of "Ukrainians". Originally the State of
Kieff, the foundation of which took place at the
beginning of the 9th century, had the name of "Rusj",
to which in the Latin chronicles corresponds the
appellation of "Ruthenia". This is the origin of the
name of "Rutheni", which was first applied to the
population of the State of Kieff as early as the
10th century. The appellation of "Ukrainia" appears
for the first time in the 12th century, and at that time
already comprehends all the territories on which the
Ukrainian people was settled. But it is only since
the 17th century that this appellation was generally
used, especially since the revolt of the whole Ukrai-
nian people under the Hetman Chmelnyckyj, a change

40

of names which is not isolated in history (cf. Rumania,
that formerly was called Moldavia and Wallachia
respectively). Only in the Western parts of Ukraina,
especially in Galicia, Bukowina and in North Hungary,
the original appellation of "Rutheni" still remained
in use for a long time, but had to give way to the
common name of "Ukrainians" in the last decades
before theWar after the new rise of Ukrainian civilization.

The Russians wrongly claim the foundation of
the state of Kieff to themselves, as the cradle of the
Russian people. The later Russian Empire did not
originate in the State of Kieff but in the principality
of Suzdal, North East of Moscow. This was not
founded before the twelfth century, and in its foun-
dation other peoples took part than in ihe formation
of the Empire of Kieff: There were the Radimitches
and Vijatitches, who belong to the Northern group
of the Eastern Slav tribes, besides the Finns, who
are not of Slav descent. The Russians are not a
purely Slav race, but a blending of Slav blood with Finn.

That the old State of Kieff was not the work of
the Russian, but of another people, whose descendants
are called Ukrainians, is proved by the fact that the
literary documents of that period show Ukrainian
linguistic features, and besides by the fact, that the
constitution of that time, in spite of the authority of
the prince, shows a democratic stamp, which is a
characteristic feature of the Ukrainian nationality. The
position of the popular assembly, called "Vitche"
(see Chapter II.), is a phenomenon not only without
a parallel in the history of that time, but utterly in-
consistent with Russian or Polish constitutions at
any time.

41

The period of the princes of Kieff was, moreover,
of great importance for Ukrainian history, because
in its bloom, i. e. under the grand-prince Volodymyr
the Great (980—1015) and under his immediate suc-
cessors, the whole Ukrainian people was united under
the sceptre of the grand-princes, and with its national
civilization predominated over Eastern Europe of that
time. Especially the whole country, which at present
is known under the geographical name of EastGalicia,
formed an integrant part of the Empire of Kieff, and
when afterwards the latter was divided into several
principalities, East Galicia for a long time still re-
mained in a close alliance with the Empire of Kieff.
Nay, what is still more, when the former Empire of
Kieff by being divided into several principalities was
considerably weakened, so that it was not able any
longer to resist the wild hordes of the Mongols in
the thirteenth century, the traditions of the State of
Kieff passed on the principality (soon afterwards the
kingdom) of Halitch in the Ukrainian territories of
East Galicia and North Hungary (the name of Galicia
comes from Halitch). While in East Ukraina the Mon-
gols devastated the country and, little by little, the in-
fluence of the new Muscovite Empire made itself
felt, the kingdom of Halitch remained a powerful
state, which however could not last more than one
century. It could not resist the Tartars, on one hand,
and the Poles and Lithuanians on the other. After
the dying out of the dynasty of Halitch the kingdom
fell to Poland in 1340; the rest of the Ukrainian
territory (Volhynia and Kieff) was taken possession
of by Lithuania. So the first state-formation of the
Ukrainian people perished.

42

In Lithuania the higher civilization of the Ukrai-
nian element at first gained preponderance. The
Ukrainian language predominated at the court of the
Lithuanian princes and even in legislation. With the
cultural importance of the Ukrainian element its po-
litical importance, too, increased. But this influence
decreased considerably when Prince Jagiello of Li-
thuania ascended to the throne of Poland, and united
his Lithuanian, hence also the Ukrainian, countries
with the Polish (1386). A desperate struggle for
predominance in the empire began between the Polish-
Lithuanian and the Ukrainian elements, which by the
battle of Vilkomir (1435) was decided in disfavour
of the Ukrainians. So the Poles took the rule of the
Ukrainian people.

How the Poles exercised their rule over the
Ukrainian people, was described in the second chapter.
In the Polish-Lithuanian state the irreconcilable an-
tagonism between the Polish and the Ukrainian hi-
storical traditions, between the aristocratic regime of
the Poles and the constitution of the Ukrainians,
striving for liberty and equality of all citizens, ex-
presses itself.

Fate allowed the Poles to survive the dismal
period of the partitions and of the invasions of the
Mongols, which brought about the ruin of the Ukrai-
nian state, so it was not difficult for them to con-
solidate their kingdom on the model of the mo-
narchies of Western Europe. The common people
fell into serfdom, while the upper classes seized the
whole power in the Polish state. Aristocracy and
nobility took the helm, and after the Poles, by con-
quest and especially by the union with Lithuania,

43

succeeded in bringing the countries between the Baltic
and the Black Sea, and with them the Lithuanians,
White Ruthenians, and Ukrainians, under their rule,
the aristocratic spirit pervaded everything, and the
consequence was that the way of thinking of a ruling
nation has become a second nature with the Polish
people.

But as the single noble houses in Poland were
at feud with one another, the Polish Empire could
not defend the Ukrainians against the Tartars. So
the defence of the Ukrainian people against the
Tartars, who coming from the Crimea, invaded
Ukraina as far as the heart of Volhynia and Galicia,
was left to themselves. The Ukrainian population,
therefore, had perpetually to be ready for battle. Thus
in the sixteenth century the organization of a military
state sprang into existence among the Ukrainians,
which had its centre below the rapids of the river
Dniepr. This organization was called Zaporogian
Sitch. It was based on a military system, with strict
military discipline, but at the same time it offered
full equality of rights to all. The whole power rested
on the General Assembly of the Zaporogian citizens,
who all enjoyed equal rights. Officers and officials
were elected by the people, and it was their duty to
execute the decree of the General Assembly. The
freedom of the individual was guaranteed, but he
had to subordinate himself to the common will. That
the aristocratic constitution of Poland opposed itself
to such a democratic constitution of Ukraina, and
that the Polish nobility tried by the most atrocious
means to destroy this organization, was the conse-
quence of the aristocratic insolence of the Polish

44

nobility and the aristocratic traditions of the Polish
history. The barbarous rule of the Polish magnate
Jeremi Wisnowiecki and of other Polish noblemen
drove the Ukrainian people to despair and in 1648
the Ukrainian Zaporogian Cossacks, whom the whole
Ukrainian people from the Dniepr to the San joined,
rose under the leadership of the Hetman Bohdan
Chmelnyckyj to shake off the Polish yoke and
to regain their independence. The victorious Ukrai-
nian forces were successful and all Ukraina became
independent again. So for the second time in history
the independent Ukrainian state came into existence.

But it had not fallen to the lot of the Ukrainian
people to keep their full independence for a long time.
Owing to the previous misgovernment of the Poles
matters in Ukraina were so neglected, that a long
time was needed to restore peace and order. Nor
did the Tartars discontinue their invasions, and the
Poles always thought of recovering Ukrainian terri-
tories. So Chmelnyckyj had to look out for an
alliance. He negotiated with Poland, Turkey, Trans-
sylvania and Sweden, until at last he resolved to
conclude a treaty with Russia at Pereyaslav
in 1654.

The Treaty of Pereyaslav was by its legal nature
a spontaneous alliance of two independent states,
and a union in the modern sense of the word. Un-
justly Russian scholars are interpreting this treaty as
an incorporation of Little Russia, since a merely
superficial analysis of this treaty will suffice to con-
vince any one of the tendency of this misconstruction.
The Russian Tsar was only offered a kind of supre-
macy; for the rest full independence was reserved

45

to Ukraina in all matters of her own administration,
legislation, in her judicial, military, and church affairs.
The Ukrainian people was to elect the head of its
Republic, the Hetman, by free choice, and the Herman
elected by the free vote of the general assembly,
had even the right of carrying on an independent
foreign policy.

The treaty of the Ukrainian people with Russia
forms an important turning-point in Ukrainian history.
A new subject of sovereignty stretches out his hand
over the Ukrainian people, not to the advantage of
the latter. So the Ukrainian history gets into an im-
mediate connexion with the history of the Russian
people, and this is a people, whose national traditions
run counter to the national traditions of the Ukrainian
people.

While the Ukrainian people by its constitution
demanded full freedom and equality, and equal par-
ticipation in the government, of all free citizens, we
see the Muscovite people as early as the 12th century
striving for rigorous centralization in their state and
for absolute, despotic power of the prince. The people
assisted the prince in crushing the importance of the
boyar nobility and of the clergy and in obtaining
despotic power in the state. The despotism of the
prince, afterwards of the Tsar, became the mark of
distinction of Russian history, which, sprung from
the inner mind of the Russian people, has helped
the Russian Empire to obtain the position of a great
power in Europe. Russian historical traditions give
the absolute power in the state to a person, fitted
out with divine authority, and to an oligarchy, forming
his retinue. Outside this despotic circle the whole

46

people appears as a misera plebs, having only to,
and being ready to, obey. On similar leading ideas
the entire social system in Russia is based ; the
common property of the community, the "Mir", the
working men's organization with the bolshak at their
head (see Chapter II. &c). Even modern bolshevism
is the development of the same fundamental ideas,
the result of the specific psychology of the Russian
people ; only the Tsar and his camarilla were sup-
planted by the oligarchy of the working men's council,
despotic in their rule and absolute against all other
classes of the misera plebs (Particulars see below).

So it cannot be wondered at, that from the mo-
ment when Ukraina got into immediate connexion
with Russia, the fate of her independence was decided
in her disfavour. Soon after the conclusion of the
Treaty of Pereyaslav, however, Russia was to weak
to accomplish the subjugation of Ukraina on her
own risk. The kingdom of Poland was still a mighty
rival and for his part would not yield up Ukrainian
territories. Therefore Russia concluded a treaty with
Poland at Andrussov in 1667, by which Ukraina was
split up into two parts : the Western territories fell
under Polish, the Eastern ones under Russian rule.

In Western Ukraina, which had come under the
Polish sphere of power, Ukrainian political life and
the military organization of the Cossacks rapidly
decayed after this division.

In Eastern Ukraina, which remained with Russia,
the Russian government began their intriguing and
made use of every opportunity to curtail the autonomy
of Ukraina guaranteed by the Treaty of Pereyaslav.
Step by step the Russian Tsars subdued the Ukrai-

47

nian people to their despotic rule, and when Hetmann
M a z e p p a, at the time of the Great War with Sweden,
formed an alliance with King Charles XII. to shake
off the Russian yoke, he was defeated by the Russian
army in the battle of Poltava, the Ukrainian rebellion
was suppressed by Peter the Great amidst terrible
atrocities, and the autonomy of Ukraina was entirely
abolished. In 1775 the last stronghold of Ukraina,
the Zaporogian Sitch, were destroyed by the Russians,
and with them the last remains of the second Ukrai-
nian state ceased to exist.

Now the systematic subjugation of the Ukrai-
nian people was extended to the domain of culture.
The unitarian theory, invented by Peter the Great
(cf. Chapter II.), was in the first place directed
against the Ukrainians, and the Russian governments
dealt severely and resolutely with anything connected
with the cultural independence of the Ukrainian people.

Thus at the end of the 17th century the whole
ecclesiastical literature in Ukrainian language was
prohibited and at the beginning of the eighteenth
century a general prohibition of printing Ukrainian
books was issued. Ukrainian schools were closed,
and the Russian language, which was foreign to the
broad masses of the Ukrainian population, was intro-
duced in the schools. The Uniat faith was suppressed
altogether in Ukraina, and all those who professed
it were forced by cruel persecutions to embrace the
Orthodox faith.

At the same time Russia began to work to the
partition of Poland. As the Polish Empire was getting
weaker and weaker by interior troubles, it was nol
difficult for Russia to bring it to ruin and to pluck

48

the ripe fruit, i. e. to appropriate the most important
Ukrainian territories, that still were under Polish rule,
to themselves on the partitions of Poland (1772 — 1795).
Only East Galicia and North Bukowina fell to the
Austro-Hungarian Monarchy on the partition.

In the Ukrainian territories incorporated in Russia,
the Russian Empire continued to maintain the unitarian
theory of Peter the Great and suppressed by force
all endeavours of the Ukrainian people at an indepen-
dent development of their culture. Thus also those
Ukrainians, who formerly had stood under Polish
rule, where given the new name of "Little Russians",
and the Russian government most ruthlessly applied
the former policy of extermination of nationality against
this new issue of "Little Russians". Yet the attempts at
Russianizing the Ukrainians could not be successful.
It is true that Russian culture, by means of public
instruction and by the absolute prohibition of the
Ukrainian language in the press and in public life,
exercised a mighty influence on the Ukrainian educated
classes, nevertheless the feeling of national indepen-
dence remained alive in the people, and the national
Ukrainian literature began to flourish again (see
Chapter II.). Besides, a lively political intercourse
between the Ukrainians living in Russia and those
living in Austria is to be noticed, a national movement
springing up among the Austrian Ukrainians, which
directly aspired to the political independence of the
Ukrainian people.

While in Russia all efforts of the Ukrainian people
to regain their independence were suppressed by
force, the Austrian Ukrainians made use of their con-
stitutional rights, and with their political opponents,

49

the Poles, carried on an unequal political war, which
more and more came to a critical point and took
larger and larger dimensions.

Between the two irreconcilable opponents, the
Ukrainians and the Poles, the Austro-Hungarian
Monarchy made her appearance as a third party,
and the mere fact that there was a third party, who
had the right to intervene as an arbitrator, immediately
after the partitions of Poland roused great sympathies
and hopes for the Austrian rulers with the Ukrainian
population. The first rulers, Maria Theresa and Josef II.,
acquired so much merit by their liberal reforms in
favour of the peasantry, that the memory of their rule
is still living with the Ukrainian people. This is why
the Ukrainian population afterwards, too, stood faith-
fully by the side of the Austrian rulers, although the
latter soon changed the system. When in 1846 the
Polish Republic of Cracow was incorporated in the
Austrian Monarchy, the Poles claimed, that West-
Galicia should be united with East-Gaiicia into one
crown province and that they should be entrusted
with the rule of the whole country. Against this
claim the Ukrainians solemnly protested and in 1848
demanded, that Galicia should be divided into two
crown provinces and that the administration of East-
Galicia should be left to the Ukrainian people. In
the period of the absolute reign of the Emperor
Francis Joseph I., 1850 — 1860, Galicia remained divided
into two administrative districts : the administrative
districts of Lemberg and Cracow. This division was
adjusted mainly to the frontiers of the two peoples
living in Galicia, the Ukrainians and the Poles. As
late as 1867, after the disastrous war with Germany.

the Austrian constitution created a far-reaching auto-
nomy of the provinces with special privileges of the
Diets. By this constitution the wish of the Poles was
complied with, and the whole of Galicia, hence the
Foolish as well as the Ukrainian part of the country,
were united into an administrative union under Polish
rule. It is true that the constitution of 1867 proclaimed
equality of rights for all peoples in school, office,
and public life, but the Austrian government delivered
up the Ukrainians to the Polish majority in Galicia
and thus a new political war was kindled between
the two peoples, in which the Poles were intent on
more firmly establishing and extending their provincial
autonomy, while the Ukrainians continued to protest
against the Polish autonomy and to demand the
division of Galicia into two provinces according to
the territories of settlement of the two peoples.

The Austrian government complied with all
wishes of the Poles, because they wanted their votes
in parliament, and the Poles always demanded new
political rights in return, on the expense of the Ukrai-
nians. But the more the Poles oppressed the Ukrainian
people, the more grew the national consciousness
and the power of resistance of the Ukrainian people.
But in spite of all persecutions and reprisals Ukrai-
nian civilization developed more and more, and when
manhood suffrage and vote by ballot were introduced,
they found well-organized political cadres of the
Ukrainian people. As the Poles continued to exercise
their sovereign rights over the Ukrainian people
without fulfilling the least of duties, the Ukrainian
people took to self-defence of their cultural, econo-
mical and political life. But their self-defence met

51

with the geheral opposition of the Polish lords, so
that political fights of many years had to be carried
on to obtain the permission of opening a public school,
in which instruction was to be given in the Ukrainian
language, or of founding an Ukrainian agricultural
cooperative society with a sphere of action and a
statute of its own. Ukrainian elementary school
training was entirely suppressed, the number of
Ukrainian elementary schools decreased more and
more under the administration of the Polish educa-
tional council of the province, on the other hand
Polish teachers were systematically appointed in
Ukrainian elementary schools, to force the Ukrainian
population to learn the Polish language and to
increase the number of analphabets in Ukrainian
schools. Notorious was the struggle of the Ukrainian
students for the foundation of an independent uni-
versity at Lemberg, which in spite of the great
ability of the academic youths and of several scholars
of Ukrainian nationality met with an open "Veto" of
the Polish lords and has remained an unrealized
demand to the present day. Notwithstanding the
abolition of serfdom the Ukrainian peasant was
treated as a serf by the Polish squire and was not
allowed to enjoy any human rights, until the agrarian
strikes taught the Polish land-owners, that they were
not allowed to treat the peasants as part of the
inventory. Nevertheless during the War the Polish
land-owners, under pretence of war measures, tried
to introduce compulsory labour on their estates and
to reestablish the old corvee. It was only by their
energetical resistance that the farmer's wives succeeded
in putting a stop to the insolence of the Polish lords.

52

The administration of Galicia lay in the hands of
the ruling Polish circles and the Ukrainians were
almost entirely excluded from participation. The
whole administrative apparatus of East Galicia was
utilized to prepare the elections, and by persecutions
and threats the Polish lords succeeded in forcing
all Jews to become instruments of Polish policy,
and by vexations and falsifications the Ukrainians
were deprived of their true national representatives
in all representative bodies of the communities, the
districts, the province, and the empire. It is generally
known that Galician elections cost much blood of
the Ukrainian peasants. But beyond the preparation
of elections the Polish administration did not do
anything that might be profitable for the country.
Agriculture was encouraged only inasmuch as it
was a question of subsidizing the Polish large land-
owners and of presenting them with the means,
which enabled them to lead an easy life; nevertheless
they were losing their importance from day to day,
since they squandered the subsidies which they
received, and many of them were forced to sell their
estates. For the encouragement of trade and commerce
large estimates were granted in the budget, but the
sums melted away in the hands of different Polish
functionaries and nothing was done for the promotion
of trade and commerce. In short: many millions
were squandered under Polish administration, which
encumbered the budget of the' province and brought
it to insolvency, but yielded no profit to the province,
and especially to the Ukrainian part of it. Thus
Polish high-ways and lanes, and "Polish household"
in general, have gained a world-wide reputation.

53

The assertion of the Poles, therefore, that it is to
them that the Ukrainians owe their civilization and
their orderly state of affairs, must decidedly be repelled.
On the contrary, it is they who almost reduced the
Ukrainian peasant to beggary (confer the arguments
of the Polish writer Szczepanowski : "Distress in
Galicia") and made a proletariat of the Ukrainian
middle classes. Nevertheless the Ukrainian people
entered into the political warfare against the Polish
lords on their own strength, and were not diverted
from their endeavour by any persecutions.

The political struggle between the Poles and
the Ukrainians got harder and harder and the Poles
redoubled their hatred and their persecutions, when
at the end of the 19th century the conservative party
of the Polish aristocracy and nobility lost their in-
fluence and the Polish bourgeoisie and civil servants
founded a new party, which took up the struggle for
the re-establishment of Poland in her former historical
frontiers. As the endeavours of the Ukrainian people
were running counter to this idea, the new Polish
party, the Pan-Poles, allied with all elements that
could assist them in the suppression of the Ukrainian
ideas of indepence. That accounts for the alliance
of the Pan-Poles with the Russians, and thus it is
evident, why the Pan-Poles openly supported the
Russophile propaganda, which Russia made in Austria.
Although the Pan-Poles were wrestling for prepon-
derance with the Polish aristocracy and liked to call
themselves a democratic party, they remained as imi
perialistic and aristocratic by nature as the former
political rulers. Nor did things take another turn,
when during the War, a reconciliation took place

54

between the Pan-Poles, the People's Party, and the
Polish Social-Democratic party. The historical tra-
ditions of a ruling nation were maintained as before
and all those parties did not change their position
regarding the Ukrainians, for it remained an axiom
with them, that the Ukrainians were a quantite negli-
geable and had to submit to the Polish rule. The
aristocratic principle was still predominating among
the political parties of Poland, and the Han-Poles
adopted the old aristocratic traditions of the Polish
empire unchanged from their political predecessors.
No reconciliation, therefore, is possible between the
aristocratic system of Polish sway and the democratic
system of national self-determination of the Ukrainians.
When the War broke out, the Ukrainians were
altogether oppressed in Austria by the Pan-Poles
and in Tsaristic Russia by the Russian Nationalists.
At the outbreak of the War the Austrian Ukrainians
declared for the Central Powers. It is evident that
they could not on any terms side with those powers,
who were allied with Tsaristic Russia. For Tsarism
kept nearly 35 million Ukrainians in its "jail of na-
tions" and the independence of Ukraina was not to
be thought of, as long as Tsarism with its unitarian
theory existed. Away from Russia! was the device
of the Ukrainians. To overthrow Tsarism the Austrian
Ukrainians placed their legions at the disposal of the
Central Powers. Besides, the Austrian statesmen at
the beginning of the War promised to deliver the
Ukrainians from the Polish yoke. Could then the
Ukrainians turn against the Central Powers?

Meanwhile the Ukrainians, who lived in Russia,
were forced to fight against the Central Powers on

55

the side of Russia, and it is said that they were not
reluctant to do so. On the contrary, the chronicle of
events of the first year of the War proves that it
was exactly the Ukrainian soldiers and officers, who
took a prominent part in the victories of the Allied
Powers in Eastern Europe. Yet it can be said with
full certainty, that the threads of revolution had for
a long time been stretched all over Russia and that
the Ukrainian leaders knew, that the Ukrainian people
could be delivered only by a great revolution.

Although the Ukrainians of Austria had declared
at the beginning of the War, that they were aiming
at the overthrow of Russian Tsarism, the Poles, who
up to the War had aided the Russophile propaganda,
made use of the outbreak of the Great War to re-
present the Ukrainian people to the military circles
of Austria as being Russophile, and to charge "Ru-
thenian treachery" with all defeats of the Central
Powers. The Polish administration of Galicia opened
this campaign of defamation for the purpose of de-
livering up all educated Ukrainian elements, so far
as they did not serve at the front, to the revenge of
Austrian militarism, and thus making impossible
the deliverance of the Ukrainian people of Austria.
Under the control of the Polish authorities the leaders
of the Ukrainians, who had always fought against
Russophilism and Tsarism, were denounced, many
thousands of guiltless Ukrainians were hanged, and
the atrocities committed against those who were
transported to Talerhof, are a blemish in Austrian
history; but at the same time they prove, how far
advanced the Polish political circles were in their
national hatred, that they did not shrink from dis-

5G

gracing the whole Ukrainian people, thus to get rid
of their troublesome political opponent. The Polish
political circles will never be able to clear themselves
of this charge, though the method practised by them
was soon turned against members of the Polish
people, and the court-martial death-sentences against
guiltless Ukrainian citizens, that were executed on
Polish denunciations or by Judges of Polish nationality
(e. g. the Polish judge Stanislas Zagorsk i, who
had hundreds of guiltless Ukrainian peasants and
clergymen put to death, as can be seen from several
reports in the "Arbeiterzeitung", the social democratic
paper of Vienna), and the arbitrary killings of Ukrai-
nian citizens by military detachments on the strength
of Polish calumny speak so eloquent a language,
that it is not to be wondered at, if the whole Ukrai-
nian people would rather cease to exist altogether
than any longer bear the Polish rule.

Therefore the representatives of the Ukrainian
people in Austria demanded, that Galicia should im-
mediately be divided and all Ukrainian territories
should be united into a separate province with Ukrai-
nian self-administration. But till 1918 the Austrian
government did not think of complying with this
demand of the Ukrainian people, on the contrary,
they were ready at any time to establish a separate
position of Galicia and to deliver up the Ukrainians
to the Poles, the more so as both emperors of Austria
dreamt of the crown of Poland and were willing to
push on the Austro-Polish solution (i. e. the union
of Austria and Poland under one monarch) with all
possible means, hence over the heads of the Ukrai-
nians.

57

But it was not before the end of 1917 and the
beginning of 1918 that the Central Powers saw them-
selves compelled to approach the Ukrainian problem.
For strategical reasons they were obliged to make
peace with Russia under any circumstances, and for
economical reasons they wanted provisions from
Ukraina. In Russia Tsarism had already fallen down
and the Russian revolution broke all chains, that had
been imposed upon the Ukrainian people: Ukrainia
then proclaimed her independence. (Particulars see
below.) Now Ukraina was ready to make peace, but
she demanded on the one hand, that the ethnogra-
phical frontiers should be punctually observed in the
North West (Kholm and Podlashe), on the other hand
that the Ukrainian territories of Galicia and Bukowina
should be reunited with Ukraina. Thus the first hi-
storical opportunity, at which Ukraina appeared as
an authoritative factor, showed, that the idea of the
union of all Ukrainian territories had never died out
in the people. Now the Central Powers in the Brest
Treaty expressed the recognition of the Ukrainian
Republic, but they would not cede the Ukrainian
territories of Austria. In a secret treaty, however, they
obliged themselves to separate the Ukrainian terri-
tories of Austria from West Galicia and to create a
separate province of them with Ukrainian admini-
stration. The Austrian Prime Minister Seidler signed
this secret treaty and pledged his word to the par-
liamentary representatives of the Ukrainian people,
that he would perform it.

Up to this moment the Ukrainian members of
the Austrian parliament had been in opposition to
the government. But after the conclusion of the Bust

58

Treaty, which recognized the independence of the
Ukrainian Republic, and after the promise, that the
Ukrainians would be delivered from the Polish yoke,
it was evident that the Ukrainian representatives
had to support the Seidler government, and as
Dr. Seidler was backed by German parties in
parliament, the Ukrainians, after the conclusion of
the Brest Treaty, consistently joined the German go-
vernment-majority. While the Poles had for decades,
and even during the War, allied themselves with the
Germans against other Slav peoples, the Ukrainians
had always been in opposition to the government
and to the German parties, and it was not before the
independence of Ukraina had been recognized by the
Central Powers and the division of Galicia had been
promised, that they declared themselves ready to take
part in the government. This once only the Ukrainian
representatives voted with the Germans, and only
when the holiest rights of the Ukrainian people were
at stake. Nor could the Ukrainians be interested in any
further support of the Germans, when Dr. Hussarek,
who succeeded Dr. Seidler as President of the
Council, informed the Ukrainians, that he was no
more ready to perform the secret Brest Treaty con-
cerning the division of Ukraina.

When the break-down of the Central Powers
was inevitable, the Austrian Emperor Charles, by his
manifesto of October 16th, 1918, tried to save the
continuance of the Austrian Monarchy by conceding
to all nations the right of constituting independent
political organisms on their territories and then setting
up a confederation. Separate national states, then,
were formed but they had no desire to establish a

59

confederation. The Monarchy ceased to exist. The
Ukrainian National Assembly at Lemberg, on Oc-
tober 18th, 1918, decreed the establishment of an in-
dependent Ukrainian republic on the Ukrainian terri-
tories of Austria-Hungary. The new state, in the
meeting of the Ukrainian National Council at Lemberg
on November 15th, 1918, received the name of "Re-
public of the People of West Ukraina".

The Poles, however, at once took up a hostile
attitude towards the establishment of the Ukrainian
Republic. The Ukrainians demanded from the Austrian
government, that on the strength of the above-men-
tioned manifesto the administration of East Galicia
and North Bukowina should be given to them, but
the Austrian government was too weak to perform
the manifesto in favour of the Ukrainian people, for
the Emperor of Austria was still dreaming of the
Polish crown. So the Ukrainians saw themselves
compelled, when Austria was going to pieces, to en-
force the taking-up of the administration from the
Austrian governor at Lemberg on their own risk.
Getting the start of the Poles, they succeeded on
November 1st, 1918, with the assistance of troops of
Ukrainian nationality, who were stationed at Lemberg,
in disarming other forces and taking possession of
all departments of the administration at Lemberg.
Now the Poles resorted to the well-tested means of
calumny, to make the world believe that the revolution
at Lemberg had not been brought about by Ukrainian,
but by German and Austrian forces. This assertion
is decidedly as false as all other rumours spread
about by the Poles, concerning the alleged assistance
of the Germans at the taking-up by the Ukrainians

GO

of the administration in Galicia. If in the Ukrainian
forces of East Galicia there were, by way of exception,
officers of German nationality, it was only those who
after November 1st, 1918, had joined the Ukrainian
army as volunteers, most of whom had been born
in Galicia and had during the War served in regi-
ments, where the great majority of the men were of
Ukrainian nationality. Perfectly fictitious were also
the news, fabricated by the Poles, that the Ukrainians
had promised the crown of Ukraina to the Austrian
archduke William Habsburg; for, on the contrary,
archduke William, who had voluntarily put himself
at the disposal of the Ukrainian National Council,
had to resign the command of the Ukrainian legion
and to retire from his position : he has now for
some time been living in St. Basil's Convent at
Buczacz.

Let the Poles say whatever they will, yet they
cannot deny the fact, that after the chains, which
had been imposed on the Ukrainians by the Austrian
government, had been broken, the whole Ukrainian
people of East Galicia rose to defend their territories
against the Poles. At the beginning of November 1918
the Ukrainians wanted to take the administration of
their national territory in their hands without blood-
shed. But when the Poles drove them from Przemysl
and Lemberg by force of arms, nothing was left to
the Ukrainian people but to enter into the war with
the Poles. Still now a bitter war is being waged in
East Galicia between both peoples, it openly being
the aim of the Ukrainian people to shake off the
Polish yoke once for all. It would be downright ridi-
culous to speak of "German intrigues", or to pretend

61

that the Ukrainians are not fighting for self-deter-
mination as a nation, but for other reasons.

Of still greater consequence than what happened
on the Ukrainian territories of the Austro-Hungarian
Monarchy, were the events on the territory of Great
Ukraina within the bounds of the former Russian

t

Empire. With this report we come to the last epoch
of Ukrainian history, which may be said to be of
the greatest importance for the appreciation of the
historical mission of the Ukrainian people.

As was said before, Tsaristic Russia went to the
war to destroy the Ukrainian Piedmont in Galicia
and Bukowina, and thus to give the death-blow to
the Ukrainian people's spirit of freedom. Therefore
still in times of peace all preparations were made,
definitely to secure this object in war. On the one
hand the nationalist circles of Russia set in with a
widespread Russophile propaganda in Galicia, Buko-
wina, and North Hungary, to prepare the Ukrainian
people on these territories for the entire union with
Russia and separation from Austria, on the Ukrainian
territories of Russia on the other hand they used
every possible means, by dislocation of Russians in
the most important centres of Ukrainian trade, to
nip the propagation of the Ukrainian people's endeav-
ours for national independence in the bud. They
appointed nationalist Russian officials everywhere in
Ukraina, encouraged the incessant immigration of the
Russian educated classes and Russian commercial
and manufacturing circles into the large towns of
Ukraina, and with them great numbers of Russian
working men came into Ukraina, so that in all large
towns of the country, especially in Kieff and Odessa,

62

a great majority of "true Russian people" entirely
overflooded the paltry contingent of Ukrainian middle
class people. Besides, it must be taken into con-
sideration that the Ukrainian educated classes them-
selves often allied with those Russian organizations,
who wanted to bring about the break-down ofTsarism
and thereby a new social order in Russia. Thus at
Kieff the best organized cadres were those of the ill-
famed "Black Hundred" in the service of Tsarism,
and on the other hand the organizations of the
Russian revolutionaries, in which Ukrainians, too,
took part, and by which the revolutionary doctrines
of the Russian circles were propagated among the
Ukrainian educated classes. In these organizations
the Ukrainians played an important part.

During the War the Russians took care that in
Ukraina chiefly such troops chould be dislocated, as
had a majority of Russians ; in the Russian territory,
on the other hand, many Ukrainian troops were
stationed. It is known that the Petrograd garrison
on the day of the outbreak of the revolution consisted
mainly of Ukrainian troops, who immediately after
the revolution was proclaimed, held a procession in
Petrograd and solemnly demanded the independence
of Ukraina.

But all these means were not able to prevent the
living mind of the Ukrainian people from striving for
deliverance. In the broad masses of the population
the historical traditions of a free and independent
people continued to live in spite of all violent mea-
sures. For a long time these ideas had to be cherished
in secret, but when with the proclamation of the
Russian revolution the chains of Tsarism were broken,

63

the whole Ukrainian people at once declared its
independence and could not be diverted from its
demand by the great numbers of Russians in the
large towns of Ukraina. All classes of the people
united and elected the Central Rada at Kieff, who
with their Commissaries of the People demanded the
recognition of the autonomy of Ukraina from the
revolutionary government of Russia.

Now it appeared again, that the inner mind of
the Russian can never be reconciled with the inner
mind of the Ukrainian, people. Although with the
break-down of Tsarism and the beginning of the
revolution free scope was given to true freedom and
democracy, the revolutionary government of Russia
from the outset contented themselves with only pro-
claiming liberal ideas, among which was also self-
determination of the peoples, but they were far from
granting self-determination to the numerous peoples
of Russia and especially from actually allowing
the Ukrainian people's claim for self-determination.
Tsarism was crushed, but the spirit of the absolute
rule of the peoples by an oligarchic upper class,
which had been the fundamental idea of Tsarism
and the result of the historical traditions of the Mus-
covite people, in contradistinction to the Ukrainian
people's ideas of true democratic liberty and equality,
was upheld, and Russian despotism only changed
its name. The Tsar was supplanted first by the
Government, which was composed of several members,
but soon the ranks grew thinner, the contest between
M i 1 j u k o w and Kerenskyi was decided in favour
of the latter, and Kerenskyj, supported by the
favour of the Russian people, usurped the dictator-

64

ship. There was an autocratic ruler of Russia again,
but in his dictatorship he was only disturbed by the
fact, that he could not claim that general recognition,
which in their time the Tsars had gained for cen-
turies, and the consequence was, that other dictators,
too, appeared, such as K o r n i 1 o v, K a 1 e d i n and
others. Thus the Russian revolution, in the very first
months of her existence, degenerated into a contest
for the rule between several dictators.

But all those dictators agreed in denying the
Ukrainians their national independence and in using
all means conceivable to rule them from Petrograd
as before and to paralyze their endeavours for inde-
pendence. Thus between the Russian revolutionary
government and the Central Rada at Kieff a continuous
fight began, the latter having to defend themselves
not only against the attacks of the Russian govern-
ment of Petrograd and Moscow, but also against
the attacks of the Soldiers' and Workmen's Councils,
formed of soldiers and workmen of Russian nationality
at Kieff, Odessa, Kharkoff etc. For from the moment
when the Ukrainian Central Rada formed at Kieff and
demanded the national autonomy of Ukraina, they
had the whole Russian people against them; who-
soever had a Russian way of thinking and feeling,
fought with all their power against the demand for
the independence of Ukraina. Now as before the
inner mind of the Russian people culminated in the
ideal of absolute rule: It is only the Russians who
can rule, and only single persons ; all others have
to obey.

On exactly valuing these facts, one is surprised
how much elementary force there was in the Ukrainian

65

people, that in the very first year of the Russian
revolution it resisted the perpetual hostilities of the
Russian government as well as the incessant intrigues
and revolts of the Russian circles in Ukraina. This
was the people which immediately before had been
officially declared not to exist, to be only a branch
of the Russian people, as it were, a quantite
negligeable without a civilization and a tradition of
its own.

In these circumstances the Ukrainian people and
its organ, the Central Rada at Kieff, could not at
once step forth with the demand for entire separation
from Russia, and at the beginning they confined
themselves to the attainment of autonomy on all
Ukrainian territories of Russia. But the more they
insisted on the performance of their autonomy, the
more they met with the opposition of the Russian
government at every turn, and with regular revolts
of Russian circles in Ukraina. So the Ukrainian
people had to understand, that by friendly arrange-
ments they would never effect the autonomy of
Ukraina within Russia, and this understanding soon
became so general, that the government of the Central
Rada, that consisted of supporters of a free federation
of Ukraina with Russia, had to give way to another
government, who were ready immediately to carry
into effect the common national ideal of independence
of Ukraina without federation with Russia, even
against the will of Russia. The result of the elections
for the Russian Constituent Assembly was an over-
whelming majority of Social Revolutionaries in
Ukraina, who demanded the entire separation from
Russia, and when the Constituent Assembly was

60

driven away by the latest Russian government of the
Bolshevists, nothing was left to the Central Rada
but to proclain on their own authority what they
had wanted to obtain from the Constituent Assembly.
Thus at Kieff at the beginning of 1918 an independent
Republic of the Ukrainian People was proclaimed
and thereby the separation of Ukraina from Russia
was accomplished.

In Russia a Bolshevist government was formed
with Lenin and Trotzkyj at their head. They at
once gained a large popularity by declaring, in contra-
distinction to the former revolutionary governments,
that they were willing at once to make peace with
the Central Powers. It was the general opinion in
Russia that the disastrous war should be finished at
all costs, to enjoy the results of the revolution in
peace. The Bolshevists were in need of peace to
help their endeavours to triumph. They were conscious
that the great numbers of returning soldiers would
be the best material for securing the communist pro-
paganda. They were ready to deliver up to them not
only the last remains of the Tsaristic regime but also
all organizations of the propertied classes without
any restriction, to create the future cadres of the
bolshevist regime out of the millions of the army-
forces flowing back in disorder. The War and the
revolution had turned millions of workmen and sol-
diers out of work, therefore the Bolshevists resolved
to bring these millions to their side by giving them full
scope, by delivering up the propertied classes to them,
and then by enrolling them in their own Red Guards.

As apostles of peace the Bolshevists at once got
the rule over the whole of Russia. To shape this

67

rule to the latest fashion, they also proclaimed self-
determination of the peoples and during the peace-
negotiations they recognized Ukraina as an inde-
pendent contracting party and granted the Ukrainians
the right of self-determination which was claimed by
them. Nevertheless this recognition was of a nature
merely theoretical, for soon such an antagonism ap-
peared between the Bolshevist government and the
Ukrainians, that on the conclusion of the Brest Treatv
it came to an open rupture, and the Ukrainian re-
presentatives at Brest were forced to conclude the
Treaty with the Central Powers earlier than the
Bolshevist government did in the name of Russia.

For one has to take the following facts into
consideration :

In the same measure as the first Russian govern-
ments during the revolution had remained faithful to
the historical traditions of the Russian people, the
Bolshevists, too, are a true embodiment of the Russian
mind, with a propensity for the rule of a small oli-
garchy and the implicit obedience of the people. But
the leaders of the Bolshevists went farther than their
predecessors, they dreamt of ruling the world. They
did not content themselves with Russia, so they
preached internationalism. But in the former Empire
of Russia they wanted to rule all peoples alone and
directly, and by self-determination of the peoples they
understand, that all peoples of the former Russia
should be forced to recognize the sovereignty of
Russia and thereby the rule of Russian Bolshevism.

On closer examination of its nature Bolshevism
will be found to be of a creation specifically Russian.
Socialization of all instruments of production as well

68

as communism, which the Bolshevists pass off as
their religion, require a stern, absolute rule, which
has to take the management of the whole social ap-
paratus into strong hands. For such an order, which
can be' created only over the head of the individual,
a foundation had long age been created in Russia.
In the 2nd chapter it was pointed out, how the in-
stitution of the common property of the community,
the Mir, the working men's organization with the
"Bolshak" at its head, were the natural outcome of the
specific mind of the Russian people. Now Bolshevism
makes a general principle of these institutions, so it
is not to be wondered at, that in the second year of
the Bolshevist government a stern organizaticn was
already introduced in Russia. Individual freedom and
equality are supplanted by the equal subjection of
all to the rule of the oligarchy, much as it had been
under Tsarism. Only that the rulers are now called
Lenin and Trotzky], and instead of the Tsaristic
camarilla the Workmen's Councils hold their meetings,
and they, too, are mainly blind tools in the hands
of the rulers, and as the representatives of a very
small class of the Russian people (the industrial pro-
letariat) they deserve the name of an "oligarchy". But
while Tsarism had been got over by modern history,
Bolshevism has seized the latest catchwords, which
are especially qualified to unite all malcontents, and
it is no secret, that in Russia the discontent of the
broad masses dates from centuries past and was
pushed to extremes by the Great War.

In the Ukrainian people, however, in spite of all
discontent no foundation ever existed for Russian
Bolshevism, especially because it is a Russian creation

69

which is utterly inconsistent with the mind of the
Ukrainian people. Full freedom of the individual,
equality of all citizens, the right of all to cooperate
in the government of the community on democratic
basis : these are inborn wants of the Ukrainian people ;
hence its unswerving demand to keep and protect
private property. Only where history has esta-
blished illegalities and deprived the working people
of their soil, to bestow it upon thepriviliged classes of
the large land-owners, the Ukrainian peasant demands
abolishment of the illegalities and allotmend to the
peasants, against reasonable compensation, of the
estates of the large land-owners, which had in their
time accrued to them contrary to law. It is obvious
that this demand has nothing in common With Bolshe-
vist communism.

* On the contrary, when we study the history of
the last two years of war without prejudice, we see
that there is such an antagonism between Russian
Bolshevism and the Ukrainian point of view, that
a fundamental conflict arises, wherever Bolshevism
endeavours to subdue the Ukrainian people.

Still before the conclusion of the Brest Treaty
the undisciplined masses of the Russian army were
flowing back from the front. In the Ukrainian large
cities there were Russian workmen's and soldier's
councils, and thus all "true Russian people" united
to deprive Ukraina of her independence. The Ukrai-
nian government had no national army at their disposal
and was so imperilled by the Bolshevist soldiers,
that after the conclusion of peace they had to re-
course to the protection of the Central Powers. (It is
true that the Allied Powers before the conclusion of

70

the Brest Treaty wanted to induce the Ukrainians to
continue the war, but it was impossible to do so
against the will of the whole people. So the Ukrai-
nian government was forced to enter into negotiations
with the Central Powers and to sign the Brest Treaty).
Bolshevist propaganda, with which the "true Russian
people" set in, began to be dangerous in the country,
too, as the Bolshevists used all means of agitation
and promised everything to the peasants, to interest
them in their Russian aims. Therefore the Central
Rada at Kieff, was forced to promise far-reaching
agrarian reform on the expense of the large land-
owners to the Ukrainian peasantry, to put an obstacle
in the way of Bolshevism.

The German forces drove the Bolshevists from
Ukraina, but soon became implicated in an entirely
wrong policy against the Ukrainian people. The
Central Rada was overthrown and a dictatorship was
established under the protectorate of the Germans.
A large land-owner of the name of Skoropadskyj^
who was at the same time a brother-in-law of the
German general Eichhorn, was appointed Hetman
and commenced his rule with the assistance of the
German forces and of the Russian oppressors. He
made an enemy of the whole Ukrainian people.

But when after the victory of the Allied Powers
the German forces had to leave Ukraina and the
Hetman wanted to deliver up the Ukrainian state to
Russia, Skoropadskyj's rule was done for, the
whole people rose and he had to leave. In the for-
merly Russian part of Ukraina the independent and
autonomous Republic of the Ukrainian People was
again proclaimed. Since the capture of Kieff by

71

Petlura's Ukrainian forces the Ukrainian people has
regained its independence on the formerly Russian
territories.

Before this came to pass, the events of war
created new national states on the territory of the
late Austro-Hungarian Monarchy, among them also
the Republic of the People of Western Ukraina. (See
above.) When it was proclaimed, Hetman Skoro-
padskyj, who, with the assistance of the German
forces, as was said before, ruled against the will of
the Ukrainian people, was still at the head of the
government at Kieff. At that time the government of
the Republic of the People of Western Ukraina could
not unite with Skoropadskyj's government. But
from the moment, when the government most hostile
to the people was done away with at Kieff, the idea
of the Union of all Ukrainian territories revived and
on January 3rd, 1919, this union was solemnly pro-
claimed. The Directorate of the Ukrainian People at
Kieff on January 21st, 1919, confirmed this union by
the solemn declaration of the union of all Ukrainian
territories into one great Republic of the Ukrainian
People.

Immediately after the German forces had left
Ukraina and the Ukrainian national forces had
occupied Kieff, the Bolshevists appeared again with
their propaganda and with their schemes of conquest.
As the Ukrainian large towns still show a great
majority of Russians and as the Cossacks of the
Don as well as the numerous miners of the Donetz
basin are now among the followers of Bolshevism,
they can very easily make incursions into Ukraina.
They are endowed with large funds by the Russian

72

Bolshevist government and always get succour directly
from Russia.

At present the Ukrainian Directorate is in a state
of war with the Russian Bolshevists. They have
ordered further enlistments of recruits in Ukraina and
the levy is going on well. The Ukrainian government
is quite aware of the fact that they have to carry
through the war against the Bolshevists to the end,
because only they are threatening the independence
of Ukraina.

Wrongly the opponents of the independence of
the Ukrainian people want to prove, that the Ukrai-
nians themselves are Bolshevists and are not to be
trusted in spite of their warfare against the Bolshevists.
Such assertions have a distinct tendency and are due
to perfect unacquaintance with the actual circumstances.

It was already proved above, that the Ukrainian
people decidedly reject Bolshevism as a form of
government and can never be reconciled to it. In
spite of their fight against Bolshevism agrarian reform
appears as a condition sine qua non of the Ukrai-
nian constitution. The Ukrainian formula, however,
does not say socialization of the soil, but nationali-
zation of the same. For the latest Ukrainian Workmen's
and Peasants' Congress in Ukraina (in January of
this year) resolved that private property should
be kept, but demanded that the estates should be
purchased from the large land-owners by the state
and allotted to the peasants against reasonable com-
pensation, which should be paid to the state by the
peasants. Only at the beginning of Bolshevist agitation
there were some so-called supporters of the ideas

73

of Bolshevism among the Ukrainian peasants, but
this was only due to the fact that many peasants did
not understand the difference between socialization
and nationalization of the soil. After the latest Work-
men's and Peasants' Congress there can be no doubt,
that the Ukrainian peasants decidedly disapprove of
the Bolshevist principle of socialization.

Russian Bolshevism, however, is not only a
danger for Ukraina, but for the whole of Europe, not
only because it disposes of catchwords highly effec-
tive on states of the soul caused by war psychosis,
and therefore can be spread everywhere like a con-
tagious disease, but also because on the ruins of
individual freedom and equality and in the place of
true democracy of the peoples it proclaims the pre-
ponderance of one class, that will rule and subdue
all others. European culture with the countless trea-
sures of intellect and civilization is threatened. There-
fore the danger must be localized, not to degenerate
into a chronic disease. Insofar as Bolshevism is in
accordance with the mind of the Russian people, it
shall be upheld, but confined to the Russian people.

This localization can be carried out only by
the Ukrainian people. As the immediate neighbours
of the Russians, only the Ukrainians can prevent the
sphere of influence of Bolshevism from being extended
to the rest of Europe and there striking deep roots.
If the Ukrainian people stops Bolshevism on its way,
it can appear in Europe only for a short time and
by way of exception, for Ukraina is the connecting-
link between Orient and Occident.

The Ukrainians are also in the first place fit for
this task, because thereby they are protecting their

74

own independence. For so many centuries Ukraina
had to ward off the pillaging expeditions of the
Mongols, Tartars, and Turks, and by doing so has
gained great merit in the history of European civili-
zation. This time, too, she is ready to perform a
similar mission against Bolshevism, but she demands
loyal support in return and admission into the Eu-
ropean community of peoples.

75

IV. The Ukrainian Territory.

As far as its history can be traced back, the
Ukrainian people was, on the whole, settled on the
same territory as at present. Thus at the time of the
great-prince Volodymyr the great in the 10,h century
the frontiers of the State of Kieff did not include
much more nor essentially other territories, than
belong to the ethnographically coherent national
territory of the Ukrainian people at present. It may
justly be said, therefore, that the present Ukrainian
territory is marked out not only by history but also
by ethnography, hence that the territory claimed by
the Ukrainians is their ethnographical as well as
historical territory. But as only the ethnographical
principle is to be taken into consideration at present
(see 1st chapter), it can be noticed that the former
historical frontiers have given way a little in the
West, but have largely extended towards the East.
In the West the Ukrainian territories originally reached
as far as the Vislok and even as far as the Visloka,
tributaries of the Vistula, while at present, except
for the territory of the Lemkes, which goes far back
to the West in the Carpathian Mountains, not many
territories reach beyond the river San (likewise a
tributary of the Vistula). On the other hand the

7G

Ukrainian settlements are expanding more and more
towards the East, so that at present great numbers
of them reach the Volga and the Caspian Sea.

Leaving this purely ethnographical process,
however, out of the question, it must be stated that
the Ukrainian territory was never extended on the
expense of foreign national territories. The Ukrainian
people never aimed at conquests and annexations,
it was itself, on the contrary, the object of foreign
conquest, and for many centuries it was split up
between two foreign state territories (Poland and
Russia, see 3rd chapter). The consequence was that
the Ukrainian people, save on its coherent national
territory, is represented on foreign territories only by
virtue of the natural process, while on the Ukrainian
national territories the former conquerors very often
had the chance of partly substituting their own settle-
ments for the original settlements of the Ukrainian
people. In the larger towns on the coherent Ukrainian
territory as well as here and there in the country
we find a population composed of many nationalities
and among them sometimes a large percentage of
Poles or Russians. This circumstance is, on the one
hand, fully justified by the Ukrainian history down
to the present day (see 3rd chapter), on the other
hand it is not such as, in any way, to prejudice the
frontiers of the coherent Ukrainian territory, all the
more since the actual settlements of foreign nations
on the latter appear only as islands in the large
Ukrainian sea.

It would be a great injustice, if the Peace Con-
ference should grant any right over the whole
Ukrainian territory, or over parts of it, to the Poles

77

or Russians, under the pretext that the Ukrainian
territories here and there show a considerable per-
centage of Polish or Russian population. The spirit
of the modern age is not favourable to one-sided
conquests and annexations, since self-determination
of the peoples is inconsistent with it. The injustice
which Germany committed by the annexation of
Alsace-Lorraine must be repaired. Thus restitution
must be made for all one-sided conquests, hence
also those territories which in course of history
have come under the sway of other peoples by
conquest, must be given back to the nation, which
is settled on them. As neither the Polish nor the
Russian islands within the Ukrainian territory are
the result of former annexations, neither Poland nor
Russia can lay claim to the Ukrainian territory on
this legal title. This also settles the argument, so
often alleged by the Poles, that because of the large
percentage of Poles living on the Ukrainian territory
they are entitled to claim as much of the Ukrainian
territory, as corresponds to the number of the Polish
population living there.

But the Poles are going farther in their demands.
They are claiming the whole of Galicia (hence East
Galicia, too,) the Governments of Kholm, Podlashe,
and a part of Volhynia for themselves.

Let us now contemplate the population on these
territories.

A. We first of all begin with Galicia.

It is well known to every scholar that, wherever
on earth one nation is ruling another, the statistics
of nationalities always turn out in favour of the ruling
nation. Considering that before the war the Ukrainian

78

people on all parts of its national territory was under
the sway of different foreign nations, it is obvious
that official statistics reduced the numbers of the
Ukrainian population. This was the case in Russia,
in Bukowina, in Hungary, and in Galicia.

In Galicia it was of great consequence to the
Poles, by means of their administrative apparatus
to prove that in the whole of Galicia the Poles
had the majority; this was easily done. But when
the political struggle between the Poles and the
Ukrainians confined itself more and more to East
Galicia, the Poles used all their energy, to curtail
the great majority of Ukrainians in East Galicia by
force at every census, and by falsifications carried
on systematically to attain in course of time, that
according to official statistics the number of the
Poles in East Galicia appeared to be almost equal
to the number of the Ukrainians.

For this purpose they used different means.

First of all they effected by their influence in the
Austrian central offices, that in the official publications
Galicia was always treated as one administrative
union : so at first glance it was concealed from any
foreigner, that in East Galicia not the Poles, but the
Ukrainians had a great majority.

Besides, the Poles made the most of the fact,
that the official statistics contained no column for
nationality, but a column for "language spoken in
every day life", the languages allowed by law being
particularized. As the "Yiddish" language was not
recognized by law, the Jews of Galicia had to be
entered in the columns of the Polish, the Ukrainian,
or the German language, and the consequence was,

70

that with very few exceptions the Jews, whether they
liked or not, were forced by the Polish authorities
to enter their names in the column of the Polish
"spoken language". Althoug the "language spoken in
every day life" can not by its nature be fit un-
questionably to define the nationality of the individual,
still the opinion is adhered to that nothing but the
nationality is decided by this column, and that the
"language spoken in every day life" was introduced
into the census statistics immediately for the purpose
of fishing in the troubled waters. The consequence
was that not only almost all Jews were entered as
Poles, but also all somehow dependent elements of
other nations (chiefky Ukrainians) were stamped as
Poles. Above all, those Ukrainians who embraced
the Roman Catholic faith, were almost without ex-
ception entered as Poles, although they were Ukrai-
nians not only by their mother tongue but also by
descent. Many Germans, too, who were Roman Ca-
tholics, were often entered as Poles.

Lastly the organization of censuses in Galicia
was such as to encourage falsifications of the official
statistics at every turn. According to the regulations
the censuses in the country had to be carried through
by the local authorities : but their superintendence
fell to the duty of the chief magistrates of the district,
and in East Galicia the consequence was, that, for
communities which were likely to return the true
numbers of the Ukrainian population, the Polish chief
magistrates appointed special commissioners of Polish
nationality, who arbitrarily entered the Ukrainians as
Poles. On the manorial estates the lords of the manor
were entrusted with specifying the nationality of all

8U

their attendants, and as the lords of the manor were
mostly Poles, the grossest falsifications in favour of
the Poles are to be found in their returns. In the
larger towns at last census forms were introduced,
which had to be filled in by the master of the house.
Neither servants nor sub-tenants entered their parti-
culars in the columns, but this was done by the
master of the house himself. That is why in larger
towns falsifications so often occur in favour of the
ruling, i. e. the Polish nation.

The entire inadequacy of the official statistics
of the "language spoken in every day life" for the
proportion of the Polish to the Ukrainian population
can be seen by a comparison of the results of scien-
tific calculations after the ethnographical method of
the forties and fifties of the past century with the
returns of the official statistics of later censuses, and
by a comparison of the official censuses with each
other.

The first three calculations after the ethnogra-
phical method, which eliminate the Jews as a se-
parate nationality, show the following figures for
Galicia.

I. Ethnographical Calculation.

Year

Ukrainians

Poles

Germans

Jews

of Census

0 '

/o

0/

/n

%

%

1846

501

409

20

69

1851

501

409

20

69

1857

460

420

25

94

One can see that the first ethnographical calcu-
lations (1846, 1851), which were carried through

SI

without any immediate influence of the Polish autho-
rities In Galicia, show an absolute majority of
Ukrainians even for the whole of Galicia (i. e. West
and East Gakcia together). Only in the third calcu-
lation of 1857 the majority of the Ukrainians in Ga-
licia is a relative one.

From the year 1869 the principle of individual
census is substituted for the ethnographical method
in the official statistics. The second census of 1880
already contains the column of "language spoken in
every day life", the Jews being classified under the
Polish, the Ukrainian and the German language, most
of them naturally under the Polish, so that the Polish
language in Galicia at once shows an absolute ma-
jority.

II. Official Statistical Returns according to "Language
spoken in Every Day Life".

Year

Ukrainian

Polish

Herman

of Census

%

o

• %

1880

429

515

55

1890

431

533

35

1900

42 2

54 8

29

1910

402

585

li

Now both tables cannot easily be compared with
each other, because in the first the Jews are elimi-
nated as a separate nation, while in the second they
are distributed among Poles, Germans and Ukrainians.
For the third ethnographical survey of 1857 the eth-
nographer Ficker has also made a calculation, in
which the Jews are distributed among the nations of

82

Galicia according to the territories of their residence,
and has got the following figures : Ukrainians (with
Jews) 5014%; Poles (with Jews) 47 '07% ; Germans
(with Jews) 272%. Only these figures can be com-
pared with the returns of the official statistics, be-
ginning from 1880. If \ve do so, we see that between
1857 and 1880 the number of Ukrainians is said to
have decreased from 50' 14% to 42*9%, while at the
same time the Poles are supposed to have increased
from 47-07% to 51*5%, and the Germans from 272%
to 5-5%.

At these returns of the census of 1880 we are
all the more astonished, if we consider that between
1869, when the first census was taken, and 1880
the number of Roman Catholics increased only by
7-92%, while at te same time the number of Uniats
increased by 8*75%. It is a well known fact that
in Galicia the Ukrainians almost through-out profess
the Uniat creed, the Poles almost without exception
the Roman Catholic creed. Thus the returns of the
statistics of denominations are in a striking opposition
to the statistics of languages. To rightly value the
latter, (Table II) one has, therefore, to go back to
the statistics of denominations.

In 1869 the number of Roman Catholics was by 193.233
n 1880 „ „ „ „ „ „ „ 198.569

„ 1890 „ „ „ „ „ „ „ 208.822

„ 1900 „ „ „ „ „ „ „ 236.808

~ E .2

• i_ 3 C

OJ <U o
M 5

Reduced to percent, the increase of the Uniats
between 1869 and 1880 was by 0"83% greater than
of the Roman Catholics. Between 1880 and 1890,
however, the increase of the Uniats is smaller by

83

0-01% than of the Roman Catholics, and between
1890 and 1900 it is smaller by (M%.

If with this we compare the percentage uf the
languages, we see that in 1890 the increase of the
Polish language amounted to about 15%, while the
increase of the Ukrainian language does not much
exceed 10%. Between 1890 and 1900 the Polish lan-
guage increases by more than 13%, while the number
of persons speaking the Ukrainian language rises
only by 9%.

This striking difference between the returns of
the official statistics concerning the "languages spoken
in every day. life1' and the returns of the same sta-
tistics concerning the denominations is evidently due
to incorrect survey. What in former decades still used
to occur by way of exception, that single persons
of Uniat creed, by reason of their public or private
service, professed the Polish nationality, dues not
occur any more at present. On the contrary, both
national camps in Galicia have so distinctly marked
the frontiers between each other in the last decades,
that renegades, who wanted to fling off their Ukra-
inian nationality, always had the courage of changing
their religions, too, and becoming Roman Catholics,
so that at present it may be frankly said, that the
type of "gente Rutheni, natione Poloni" has died
out altogether. So there can be no doubt to any ini-
tiated person, that the long forgotten "Un Ukrainien,
gente Ruthenus, natione Polonus", who appears as
the author of the article". "La Pologne, I'Ukraine e1
la Lithuanie" in 'Le Temps' of February 1st, 1919,
is a true Pole with the Polish ideology of a ruling

6*

84

nation (see chapter II.), who surely exchanged the
Uniat for the Roman Catholic creed a long time ago,
or never before professed the Uniat creed at all.
(Indeed he will look out in vain for another Ukra-
inian, who would in the present time uphold the
opinion maintained by him.)

One example will suffice to clear up the Method
of falsification in the censuses of Galicia. The census
of 1880 returns for the city of Lemberg:

1. According to denominations:

Roman Catholics 58.602

Uniats ^ . 17.496 *

Jews 30.961

2. According to "language spoken in every
day life":

Poles 91.870

Ukrainians 6.277

Germans 8.91 1

If we combine these figures with each other, we
come to know in which way the number of 91.870
Poles in Lemberg was got in the census.

First of all from the number of Roman

Catholics 58.602

the number of the Germans must be subtracted . 8.91 1

Thus we get the sum A of . . . . ' . . . 49.691

Then from the number of Uniats . . . . 17.496

we subtract the number of Ukrainians . . . 6.277

So we get the sum B of 11.219

Lastly the sum C of the Jews must be taken

into consideration 30.961

85

Now if we cast up the sums A + B+C, we get

A .... 49.691

B 11.219

C 30.961

the total of 91.871

i. e. the same figure as the number of the Poles in
the census returns.

Evidently the following method was applied :
From the number of Roman Catholics the number
of the Germans was subtracted, but the number of
the Jews was added in return and besides two thirds
of the Uniats had to add to the number of the Poles.
This process frequently recurs mutatis mutandis in
the censuses of all larger towns. It is obvious that
such a method cannot be fit to give the correct nu-
merical proportion between the Poles and the Ukra-
inians.

Therefore another way has to be found to come
nearer to truth. While the statistics according to
"language spoken in every day life" cannot be used
for ascertaining the nationalities, the official statistics
of denominations is much more fit for the purpose
of estimating the true numerical proportion between
the Poles and the Ukrainians. In fact the Ukrainians
of Galicia have been Uniats from ancient times, while
the Poles on principle always professed the Roman
Catholic religion.

Some corrections will certainly have to be
allowed, but they must be made on the expense oi
the Poles rather than of the Ukrainians. In fact there
arc by far more Ukrainians of Roman Catholic de-
nomination in Galicia than Poles of Uniat deno-

86

initiation, because the Roman Catholic clergy are
carrying on a far-reaching propaganda among the
Ukrainian population, but the neophytes seldom go
the length of giving up their nationality and going
over to the Poles; on the other hand it was men-
tioned above, that in these latter days there are no
persons professing the Uniat religion, who might
rightly be considered as Poles. Besides, from the
total number of Roman Catholics of Galicia those
Germans have to be subtracted, who profess the
Roman Catholic creed. Finally the Galician statistics
of denominations are not quite free from objection,
and especially in the last decades, where the falsi-
fication of the statistics of languages took larger and
larger dimensions, gross errors are to be found in
them at times, all the more since the tendency of re-
ducing the number of the Uniats or giving quite in-
accurate returns, is prevalent indeed among the census
organizations.

Leaving this tendency out of the question, the
statistics of denominations, in spite of their short-
comings, are the only official basis, from which one
has to start, to get an approximative notion of the
numerical proportion of the Ukrainians to the Poles.
But as for this purpose one cannot restrict oneself
to the general returns of the census, but has to take
into consideration the numerical proportion in the
single communities, nothing is left but to go back to
the census of 1900, because only of this census
special returns for the places of Galicia and Bukowina
are at our disposal, which is not the case with the
latest census of 1910. Besides, the returns of the
census of 1900 deserve to be given preference to the

87

census of 1910, because for the Ukrainian territories
of Russia we can avail ourselves only of the census
of 1897, the returns of which can be more adequately
compared with the returns of the former than of the
census of 1910. .

So the statistics of denominations according

to the census of 1990 will be taken as basis of
the following arguments, other statistical evidence
being referred to only by way of exception. In our
arguments we shall confine ourselves to the Ukrai-
nian national territory.

In order not to weary the reader, we shall content
ourselves with shortly sketching general outlines
without giving a detailed description of the frontiers.

The Ukrainian national territory in Galicia com-
prises, first of all, the whole of East Galicia as far
as the river San; West of the San several communities
are situated on the left bank of the river along its
lower and middle course. Towards South all com-
munities of the district of Dobromil and Lisko belong
to the coherent national territory of the Ukrainians.
To this a long strip of Ukrainian land is connected
in the South-West along the Carpathian Mountains
as far as the last Ukrainian community in the district
of Nowy Targ, which is called Shlakhtova. Here the
ethnographical frontiers cross several communities
and do not coincide with the frontiers of the political
districts.

The area amounts to 55.300 square kilometres.
On the coherent national territory the Ukrainians live
in 59 political districts or parts of districts, the city
of Lemberg forming a separate political district.

88

Leaving at present Lemberg City and the Environs
of Lemberg out of the question, the Ukrainians form
an absolute majority in all districts or parts of the
districts. In the City of Lemberg the Ukrainians were
in the minority with 18*3% and in. the Environs of
Lemberg with 49"3 ' .

On the whole there are only 17 districts or

parts of districts, where the Poles form more than

25"/0 of the population. They are the following
districts :

Sanok (part) 1.098-0 square kilometres Poles 300%

31-4"/

27-1"

09.711/
» n » ^^ ' /{)

2Q-8'7

27'20/

OK. OH'

» » Jj ^"J «-' ,'(l

27-0°/
27-p)"

27-fi'1 '

» » » **' '-' /11

25-0°/

26-3"

» i) » •-" ' /11

33-6"/
» » » *<•-' «-* /11

In the other districts and parts of districts the
percentage of the Poles varies from H% or 4'4°/0
respectively to 23*9%.

Brzozow „

95-2

Przemysl „

939-1

Jaroslau „

861-2

Cieszanow

1.1362

Mosciska

754-6

Sambor

948-1

Rudki

703-0

Brzezany

1.161-9

Podhajce

1 .060-0

Buczacz

1.192-7

Czortkow

694-2

Husiatyn

872-9

Trembowla

697-3

Skalat

917-0

Tarnopol

1.164-0

Zbaraz

739-6

89

The whole Ukrainian territory in the 59 districts
or parts of districts comprises 3.759 inhabited places,
among them only 352 places (including the City of
Lemberg) with an absolute majority of Poles. The
Germans have an absolute majority in 77 places, the
Jews in 43 places. There are, besides, 114 places in
which the numbers of Jews, Ukrainians, and Poles
compete with each other, but none of these nationa-
lities forms an absolute majority; among them the
Ukrainians have a relative majority over the Poles in
71 places. Of all 3759 inhabited places of the whole
Ukrainian territory in Galicia the Ukrainians have
an absolute majority in 3173 places.

All these figures, which are taken from the sta-
tistics of denominations of the census on 1900, prove
sufficiently that notwithstanding the considerable per-
centage of the Polish population, especially in the
environment of Lemberg and in Galician Podolia, the
Ukrainian territory in Galicia forms an ethnographically
coherent body.

The Poles, however, refer to the official statistics
of languages of the census of 1910. (Why the Ukrai-
nians refuse the statistics of languages, was already
explained above. To the census of 1910 they object
all the more, since from the records of the Austrian
Chamber of Deputies, especially from the numerous
interpellations of Ukrainian deputies it can be
seen, with which violence this census was carried
through against the Ukrainian population.) Accor-
ding to the returns of the statistics of languages of
1910 5 districts in Fast Galicia show a majority
of Poles.

90

Language spoken in every day life.
Census of 1910.

District

Ukrainian

%

Polish

%

German

%

Lemberg (Environs)

Skalat

Tarnopol

Trembowla ....

366
44-6
477
480
480

616
522
520
514
517

18
22
63
04
01

According to the census of 1880 all these districts
still showed a majority for the Ukrainian language.
In the census of 1890 the district of Skalat for the
first time returned 49*8% for the Polish against a
minority of 48-5% for the Ukrainian language. In 1900
the picture changed: The district of Skalat had again
a minority for the Polish language, while the Environs
of Lemberg showed a small majority in favour of the
Polish language. In the census of 1910 all of a sudden
the 5 districts named above returned a majority for
the Polish language.

But the difficulty is that the statistics of deno-
minations of the census of 1910 lead to entirely
different results and downright reduce the value of the
above figures, concerning the languages, to nothing.
The statistics of denominations in these districts
return the following figures:

91

IV. Denominations. Census of 1910.

District

Uniats

0/

/o

Roman
Catholics

Jews

", o •

Lemberg (Environs)

Przemysl

Skalat

Trembowla . . .

459
500
503
535
51*5

434
35-8
366
325
394

87
141
13 2

139
9 04

To infer a majority of Poles in the districts named
above from these figures, is certainly a very bold
enterprise. But the proportion is in fact much more
in favour of the Ukrainians, if we consider that the
organs of the Polish administration in the very sur-
veying of denominations were intent on reducing the
number of the Uniats. So it is needless to refute the
reference to an alleged majority of Poles in these
districts.

There only remains the City of Lemberg, which
according to the statistics of denominations, too,
shows an absolute majority of Poles. On closer exa-
mination, however, this majority is not so certain
as it appears. According to the census of 1900 the
following figures are returned for the City of Lemberg :

Entire population .... 159.877
Roman Catholics 82.828 51

Uniats
Jews .
Others

29.327 - 183

44.258 - 285

4.464- 2*2

92

According to languages :

Polish 120.634

Ukrainian 15.159

German 20.409.

In the statistics of denominations those returned
in the column of "Others" are chiefly Protestants.
As they are throughout Germans, we are not wrong
in reckoning more than half of the Germans among
the Roman Catholics. Granting even, that about
5000 Jews in Lemberg entered their names in the
column of the German language, which does not
seem very probable, we get the sum of 11.935 Germans
professing the Roman Catholic religion. If we subtract
this figure from the figure of the Roman Catholics
(82.828), the sum of 70.893 Roman Catholics is left
for the Poles, i. e. only 44*3% of the entire po-
pulation.

The untrustworthiness of the official statistics has
induced Ukrainian scholars to recast them judicially,
in order to obtain well established results. Recently
Dr. To mas hi wskyj, lecturer at the University of
Lemberg, undertook this task and, after a critical
recast of the whole statistical material, has got the
following round figures for the Ukrainian territory
in Galicia:

Entire population (1910) . 5,200.000
Ukrainians ....... . 3,850.000-- 74", „

Poles 630.000= 12%

Germans 65.000= 1%

Jews 640.000 - 12%.

These figures show, that East Galicia is indeed
a territory not so purely Ukrainian as the French

93

departments with their overwhelming French majo-
rity, but that it is not inferior to many oilier terri-
tories, e. g. in Poland, as to the percentage of the
permanent nation.

But before we are going to speak of the Ukrai-
nian territory outside the frontiers of the former
Galicia, we must define our attitude regarding the
latest demand of the Poles. The Poles have of late
been declaring the Bug-line to be the frontier of their
national territory in Galicia. This line which follows
the Bug, a tributary of the Vistula, from its head,
is neither founded on history nor on ethnography. It
is not historical, because it never played any part in
history; it is not ethnographical, since it cuts off
more than two thirds of the Ukrainian territory for
the Poles ; nor is it a geographical frontier, because
it follows the Bug only in the North East, and from
there to the Carpathians is entirely without any
foundation. But the Poles insist on the Bug line
only to support, on the one hand, their (likewise
unfounded) claims to the whole Kholm district (in
the Russian part of Poland), on the other hand to
take possession of the City of Lemberg and its
environs as well as of the purely Ukrainian oil-terri-
tory of Drohobycz. But as was proved above, these
imperialist appetites are entirely without any foundation.

/>. North of the point where the river San, before
it flows into the Vistula, touches the frontier bet-
ween Galicia and the Russian part of Poland for the
first time, the Ukrainian territory extends on the soil of
the former Russian Empire, and the first country that
belongs to the Ukrain an national territory, is the

94

Kholm district, and the territory South and East of
Kholm, i. e. Volhynia.

Here we meet with the Russian official statistics. We
can only refer to the Russian census of 1897.
Here the Ukrainians are officially called "Little Rus-
sians". As this census was taken by the official
Russian circles, who were ill-disposed towards the
Ukrainians, and the census in Russia was rarely able
to give objective, exact, and reliable results owing to
the unequal intelligence, and still more to the unequal
carefulness of the census officials, it can easily be
proved on a merely superficial critical inspection,
that by the census of 1897 the number of the Ukrai-
nians was considerably reduced in favour of the
Russians (Great Russians). The grossest falsifications
occur in the larger towns.

But there is no such corrective for the Russian
official statistics of nationalities as the statistics of
denominations in Galicia, where the Uniat creed is
so characteristic of the Ukrainian nation. Official
Russia does not know the Uniat creed, for all traces
of it have been effaced by force, and the orthodox
faith is professed by both, Russians and Ukrainians
alike. The Poles in Russia have kept their Roman
Catholic religion. So nothing is left but to take the
official statistics of nationalities of 1897 as a basis,
although-with certain reservations.

Yet just for the Kholm territory the proportion
of denominations is of great importance.

From a historical point of view the Kholm terri-
tory was most closely connected with the Ukrainian
part of Galicia. Under the Romanowitchs, till the
14th century, it formed an integrant part of the Galician-

95

Volhynian Empire, called the kingdom of Halitch.
Though it early came under Polish rule, it has always
kept its ethnographical pureness as a Ukrainian terri-
tory, although the influences of the Polish elements
and of the Roman Catholic religion made itself felt.
The great masses of the Ukrainian population resisted
all Polemizing tendencies; but when under the Polish
rule a union of the Orthodox Church with Rome was
started, the larger part of the Ukrainian population
of the Kholm territory, like those of Galicia, embraced
the Uniat faith. After the partition of Poland the
Kholm territory came under Russian rule and Russia,
as was mentioned above, did not want to recognize
the Uniat faith. So religious persecutions commenced
in the Kholm territory, and their result was, that a
large part of the Ukrainian population under Russian
pressure embraced the orthodox faith, and a smaller
part under the influence of the Roman Catholic clergy,
who set in with their propaganda, preferred to turn
Roman Catholic. Nevertheless most of the Ukrainians,
who became Roman Catholics, remained faithful to
their national traditions, and it is certainly sheer
arrogance of the Poles, to count the permanent
population of the Kholm territory among the Polish
nationality, only because part of them are Roman
Catholics.

The Polish claims to the Kholm territory are
only justified inasmuch, as in the West of the Kholm
government they have actually displaced the former
Ukrainian element by a permanent settlement of
Polish peasants. The Polish-Jewish majority in the
towns can be no guide for the demarcation of the
ethnographical frontiers (see 1st chapter).

9G

According to the official census of 1897 the
Ukrainians have an absolute majority in 6 districts
of the Khohn government (Ukrainians 52'6%, Russians
3-7%, Poles 24-4%, Jews 153%), therefore all these
6 districts must me included in the Ukrainian national
territory. Only in two South Western districts, Bilgoraj
and Zamosc, the Poles are in the majority, but there
is a great number of Ukrainian communities, which
is closely coherent with the Ukrainian national territory.
Therefore all these Ukrainian communities, ethno-
graphically connected with the coherent Ukrainian
territory, must be incorporated in the same.

So the boundary line between the Poles and
the Ukrainians in the Kholm territory starts from the
point, where the river San approaches the former
frontiers between Galicia and the Russian part of
Poland, runs over Tarnogrod, Bilgoraj, Shtchere-
breshyn, Zamosc, Krasnostav, Lubartov, Radyn, Lukov,
Sokolov, Dorohytchyn, Bielsk, and reaches the river
Narev in the government of Grodno. Here the frontiers
between the Polish and Ukrainian territories meet
with those of the White Russian territory and here
the Northern frontier of Ukraina commences.

If this boundary line is drawn as was just
specified, there can be no doubt that the claims of
the Poles to Volhynia, which is situated South-West
of the Kholm territory, are quite unfounded. The
census returns the following figures for Volhynia:
Population 2,989.482, among them 70*1% Ukrainians,
3'5% Russians, 6*2% Poles, 13'2% Jews, 57% Ger-
mans, 0-9% Czechs. So the Polish claim to the Bug
line (see above) is without any foundation, all the
more since their frontiers in the Kholm territory at

97

most reach the Vepr, a tributary of the Bug, and
only near Zamost form an enclave on the other side
of the Vepr.

C. The Northern frontier of Ukraina starts
from the White Russian territory in the West. Here
first the so-called Podlashe on the territory of the
former government of Grodno comes into question.
This territory, too, is claimed by the Poles ; with
how little right, is shown by the following figures :
V. Russian Census of 1897.

District

Entire
Population

Ukrai-
nians

c/3
a

.2
'53

C/3

3

White
Russians

o
o

<*>

%

0 '

70

/o

0/
10

"/„

Bielsk . .

164,441

391

59

4-9

349

149

Brest . . .

218,432

644

99

—

39

208

Kobryn . .

184.453

796

40

—

2-2

13 7

The above figures prove, that the territory of the
three named districts of the Government of Grodno
belongs to the Ukrainian national territory. All of
them form the frontier-line between the Ukrainians
and the White Russians.

This frontier-line continues towards East and
touches the former government of Minsk, in which
the whole district of Pinsk (74*370 Ukrainians) and
the Southern part of the district of Mozyr (79*4%
Ukrainians) belong to the Ukrainian territory. Here
the frontier-line runs chiefly along the river Pripet,
turns to the South only near Mozyr, touching the
Volhynian frontier for a short distance and reaching

98

the Dniepr at the mouth of the Pripet. From here
the frontier sweeps round towards the North and
follows the Dniepr up-stream as far as the mouth
of the river Soz. From here it continues a little
towards North East, and forming some sinuosities
reaches the administrative frontier between the go-
vernments of Mohilew and Tchernigov. Here the
vicinity of the White Russians ends and that of the
Russians begins.

D. To give an exact description of the ethno-
graphical frontier between Ukraina and the Russian
territory is not an easy problem, and chiefly in the
North it is difficult to state, without close investi-
gations being made on the spot, where the Ukrainian
territory ends and the coherent Russian territory
begins, all the more since the official Russian
statistics are made much in favour of the ruling
nation. It must be observed, besides, that the terri-
tories in question were not colonized by a dense
population before the 17th century. The colonists
came partly from Ukraina, partly from the Russian
territories, and their settlements are situated side by
side, mostly separated from each other, so that to
the present day a purely Ukrainian village touches
a purely Russian one, and the number of ethno-
graphical islands on both sides of the eventual line
of demarcation will be very large.

According to the official Russian census the
government of Tchernigov comprises 11 districts
with an overwhelming majority of Ukrainians (91 "9%
Ukrainians, 3*270 Russians, 4-6% Jews, 0-3% Ger-
mans). These undoubtedly belong to the coherent
Ukrainian national territory. But there are still 4 di-

99

stricts with a majority of Russians. In these 4 districts,
however, leaving the unreliableness of the returns of
the official Russian statistics out of the question,
there is so large a population of Ukrainian nationality,
who partly live on a coherent territory, partly separated
from each other, moreover the Russian population of
these districts has been so closely connected with
Ukraina by their history (all these territories were
under the command of Colonel Ivan Netchay at
the time of the Hetman Chmelnyckyj): that the
elimination of these 4 districts from the Ukrainian
territory would meet with the opposition even of the
Russian majority. Therefore the Republic of the
Ukrainian People claims the whole government of
Tchernigov, including the 4 districts with the official
majority of Russians, but they are ready at any time
to take the chance of a plebiscitum in these 4 districts.

From there the Northern frontier traverses the
two large governments of Kursk and Voronesh. In the
government of Kursk three districts with a majority
of Ukrainians belong to the Ukrainian national terri-
tory: Putyvl 52-5%, Hrayvoron 52-8%, Novo-Oskol
51%- Besides, the Southern part of the district of
Sudza (70% Ukrainians) and parts of the districts of
Rylsk (33% Ukrainians), Korotcha (35% Ukrainians)
and Bielograd (24% Ukrainians) come into question.

In the government of Kursk the frontier-line running
in an Eastern direction reaches the river Oskol and
enters the territory of the government of Voronesh.
Here, too, the frontier-line continues towards East as
far as the point, where it reaches the Don for the
first time. For a short distance the Don forms the
frontier of the Ukrainian territory towards South-East.

7*

100

The frontier-line leaves the stream at the mouth of
the Ikorets, sweeps towards North-East and finally
reaches the river Khoper on the territory of the Don
Cossacks. Novokhopersk is the farthest point of the
Northern frontier of Ukraina and the starting-point of
the Eastern frontier of the Ukrainian territory. In the
government of Voronesh 4 districts have a large
Ukrainian majority; of the district of Pavlovsk the
Southern part belongs to the coherent Ukrainian
territory. According to the census of 1897 the whole
Ukrainian territory of this government is inhabited by
a population of 76*2% Ukrainians and only 22,6%
Russians.

E. The Eastern frontier of the Ukrainian
national territory in the former Russian Empire starts
from Novokhopersk (in the government of Voronesh)
and runs in a Southern direction as far as Novo-
tcherkask (in the government of the Don Cossacks).
It follows the river Khoper from the start, reaches
the Don for the second time at the mouth of the
Khoper, passes over to the right bank of the Don,
to cross the Don for the third time at Novotcherkask.
An absolute majority of Ukrainians in the government
of the Don Cossacks is to be found in the rural
part of two districts: Rostov (52%) and Taganrog
(69%). If the population of the two district capitals,
according to the official returns, is included, there is
still a large relative majority of Ukrainians in these
districts (48-4% Ukrainians against 42'3% Russians).
Besides, the Western part of the Donetz district (40%
Ukrainians) comes into question.

By the districts of Rostov and Taganrog the
Ukrainian national territory is connected with Cau-

101

casia. Here the Ukrainian element is increasing from
year to year and thus the Ukrainian territory on one
place extends as far as the Caspian Sea. According
to the census of 1879 already the Ukrainian settle-
ments stretched in a large circle South and East of
Rostov and at present they comprise wellnigh the
whole of North Caucasia with the exception of small
strips along the Caspian Sea. To this territory belongs
the province of Kuban (with 36*2% Ukrainians
against 30'5% Russians) and the government of
Stavropol (with 50*8% Ukrainians against 45-7°/0
Russians). But the returns of the census of 1897 are
not quite reliable and it can be stated with certainty
that at present the percentage of the permanent
Ukrainian population is by far greater than according
to the above-mentioned census.

In North Caucasia ends the Eastern frontier of
the Ukrainian territory.

F. The Southern frontier of the Ukrainian
national territory begins near the Eastern coast of
the Caspian Sea and at first the river Terek forms
the frontier-line. It continues towards West through
the Terek and Kuban provinces and the government
of Black Sea, to reach the coast of the Black Sea
between Tuapse and Sotchi. From there the frontier-
line of Ukraina as far as the delta of the Danube
is marked by the coasts of the Black Sea and the
Sea of Azov.

Towards West the most important Southern
border-territory of Ukraina is the government of
Taurida with the Crimean peninsula. Here the
Ukrainians, according to the census of 1897, form

102

only a relative majority (42%), beside 28% Russians,
13% Tartars, over 5%, Germans, nearly 5% Jews,
3% Bulgarians, 1% Armenians. An absolute majority
of Ukrainians is to be found in three districts : Dnip-
rovsk (73-6%), Berdyansk (58-8%,), Melitopol (54*9%) -
besides considerable minorities in two districts : Eupa-
toria (26%) and Perekop (23%), where the Ukrai-
nians inhabit the northern parts of the districts. So
the whole continental part of the government of
Taurida and the northern part of the Crimea belong
unquestionably to the coherent Ukrainian national
territory. If the Crimea is taken as a whole, no nation
has an absolute majority. Only a relative majority is
formed by the Tartars together with other Moham-
medans. Among the Russians all visitors of the
watering places of the Crimea are included : so from
their number the true percentage of the permanent
Russian population cannot be inferred. Next in
number to the Russians are the Ukrainians, and be-
sides a considerable percentage of foreign colonists.
In the same measure, however, as the Tartars are
leaving the country to settle in Turkey, the territory
and the number of the Ukrainians is more and more
increasing in the Southern part of the Crimea, too,
so that the time is not far when the Ukrainian ele-
ment will be able to consider the whole Crimea as
their national territory. Those Mohammedans however,
who wish to remain in the Crimea, cannot easily
form a political organism of their own of the Southern
part of the peninsula, and owing to a thousand years
of their political relations with Ukraina they are likely
to be willing at any moment to join the Ukrainian
Republic. So the whole government of Taurida and

103

with it the whole Crimean peninsula will have to
be included in the Ukrainian national territory.

West of the government of Taurida the govern-
ment of Yekaterinoslav is situated. Here the Ukrai-
nians form 69% of the entire population, beside 17%
Russians, 5% Jews, 4% Germans, 2% Greeks, 1%
White Russians, 1% Poles, 1% Tartars. In the single
districts the percentage of Ukrainians varies between
94% and 83% in the country. In the large towns
naturally a considerable percentage of foreign nations
is returned ; thus the district of Yekaterinoslav, ex-
cepting the capital, has 74% Ukrainians, while if the
capital is included, only 56% Ukrainians are living
there beside 21% Russians, 13% Jews, 6% Germans,
and 2% Poles.

A similar proportion of nationalities can be ob-
served in the government of Kherson, where the
large towns, such as Odessa and Nikolayev, con-
siderably depress the percentage of the permanent
Ukrainian population. It is due to this fact that the
census of 1897 returns hardly 54% Ukrainians in the
government of Kherson. Yet in most districts of this
government the Ukrainians form an overwhelming
majority, between 63% and 88% in the country, in
the other districts they have a relative majority, such
as in the rural part of the district of Odessa 47%
(including the town population only 33%,). The en-
tire population of the government of Kherson consists
of 54% Ukrainians, 21% Russians, besides 11% Jews,
over 1% Poles, over 4%, Germans, over 5% Ruma-
nians, and more than 1% Bulgarians and Greeks.
The population of the city of Odessa is composed
of many nationalities. Predominant among them are

104

the Russians and the Jews, while the Ukrainians form
only the eleventh part of the population ; besides
there are Englishmen, Frenchmen, Germans, Poles,
Rumanians, Bulgarians, Greeks, Albanians and others.
In Nikolayev the Ukrainians form only one thirteenth,
in Kherson one fifth, and in Elizabetgrad one fourth
of the population. Only in 8 smaller towns the Ukrai-
nians have a majority over the Russians. These figures
are based on the official statistical returns, which
especially in the larger towns considerably reduce
the number of the Ukrainians in favour of the Russians.
Nevertheless the whole government of Yekaterinoslav
as well as the government of Kherson belong to the
coherent Ukrainian national territory. •

G. In Bessarabia the Ukrainian territory is
bounded by the Rumanian territory. Here the frontier-
line is very irregular and runs towards North West
as far as the frontier of the Austrian Empire. Many
Rumanian enclaves are situated on the coherent Ukrai-
nian territory, while on the other hand many Ukrai-
nian enclaves (over 145.000 Ukrainians) are to be
found on the Rumanian national territory.

For the coherent Ukrainian territory only two
districts of Bessarabia come into question : the district
of Akkerman with a relative Ukrainian majority
(about 27% Ukrainians, 10% Russians, 5% Jews,
16% Germans, over 16% Rumanians, 21% Bulgarians,
4% Turks), and the district of Khotin with an abso-
lute Ukrainian majority (over 53% Ukrainians, over
6% Russians, about 16% Jews, about 24% Rumanians).
The frontier-line runs over Ismail, over the mouth of
the Dniester, then up the Dniester as far as Du-
bossary, to reach the watershed between the Pruth

105

and the Dniester and to leave Bessarabia at Novo-
sielitze.

This is the Ukrainian national territory within
the former Russian Empire. Only those governments,
which are situated along the frontier-line, were made
the subject of our discussion (sections B — G). But
other governments, too, which are situated in the
heart of this territory, come into question. Besides
Volhynia, which was spoken of already, there are the
governments of Podolia (adjoining the Galician part
of Podolia), Kieff, Poltava, and Kharkov. All
these governments have an absolute Ukrainian ma-
jority and belong as a whole to the coherent territory
of the Ukrainian people. In Podolia, according to the
census of 1897 the population consisted of 81%
Ukrainians, besides 3% Russians, over 2% Poles,
and over 12% Jews. In the government of Kieff the
official returns show 79*2% Ukrainians, 5*9%, Russians,
1-9% Poles, and 12-1% Jews. In the city of Kieff the
Ukrainians form more than one fifth of the population.
The government of Poltava has the largest absolute
majority of Ukrainians : 95%, besides 4% Jews and
1% Russians. In the government of Kharkov the
Ukrainians come up to nearly 81% of the entire po-
pulation, the Russian percentage being about 18%.
With the only exception of the capital of Kharkov,
where the Ukrainians come up to one fourth of the
population, the Ukrainians have a considerable ma-
jority over the Russians in all other towns of the
district.

H In Bukovina the coherent territory of the
Ukrainian people comprises 4 districts : Kotzman,
Zastawna, Washkoutz, Wiznitz, and parts of

106

6 districts, viz of Czernowitz, Kimpolung, Radautz,
Sereth, Suczawa, and Storozynetz. The frontier-
line, which as an immediate continuation of the
Bessarabian frontier-line separates the Ukrainian from
the Rumanian national territory, runs over Novosielitze
to the West as far as the immediate neighbourhood
of Czernowitz, turns towards South East to the
frontier between Austria and Rumania, and reaches
the city of Sereth and the river Suczawa. From here
the frontier-line sweeps round to the North as far
as the watershed between the Pruth and the Sereth
basins, but soon turns to the South and South West
again over Storozynetz and Kirlibaba, where it reaches
the frontier of Hungary.

According to the Austrian census of 1900 the
population on the coherent Ukrainian territory consi-
sted of 69% Ukrainians, 0-8% Russians, 4'l°/0 Poles,
1 5*6% Jews> 5;yo Germans, 4,8n.'„ Rumanians, and
0-4% Magyars.

/. The end of the Southern frontier of the
Ukrainian national territory is situated in Hungary.
The frontier-line runs from the Galician frontier near
Kirlibaba to the West as far as the point where the
river Ruskova falls into the Vishova (Viso). Then it
turns to the North West as far as Shiget. Here it
sweeps round towards North and again towards
West, follows the river Theiss as far as the town
of Vyshkov (Visk), and reaches .the towns of
Ternanka Bartatsha. This is the end of the frontier
between the Ukrainians and the Rumanians, and
here begins the frontier between Ukrainians and
the Magyars.

107

It runs to the West in many sinuosities over
Ardiv (Feketeardo) to Kerestur (Tiszakeresztur), and
from there to Munkacs, continuing towards South
West as far as the town of Sniatyno (Izsmyele). From
there it turns to the West again as far as the point
where the river Stare falls into the Latorcza, and
sweeps to the North as far as Ungvar.

Here begins the Ukrainian-Slovak frontier,
which is very irregular. From Ungvar it turns to the
North and approaches the Carpathians, which form
the frontier between Hungary and Galicia. Near
Lublau the frontier crosses the river Poprad and
reaches the Ukrainian territories of Galicia mostly
advanced to the West, which are inhabited by the
Lemkes. This is the end of the Southern frontier of
the entire territory of the Ukrainian people, which
extends on the whole from the Caucasus to the
Beskid mountains in West Galicia.

The larger part of the Ukrainian territory in
Hungary is situated in the Carpathian mountains and
adjoins the Ukrainian territory of Galicia with its
population of Ukrainian mountaineers, who form the
majority of the inhabitants of the Carpathians. It
comprises the three Northern quarters of the county
of Marmaros, the North Eastern part of the county
of Ugocsa, two thirds of the county of Bereg, the
Northern half of the county of Ung, the Northern
border districts of the counties of Zemplen and Saros,
and the North Eastern districts of the county of Zips.

The Hungarian official statistical returns, which
are no more trustworthy than those of Galicia, show
470.000 Ukrainians in 1910, and this figure may boldly
be raised to 500.000 at least, to get an approximate

108

notion of the number of the Ukrainian population of
Hungary.

The above description restricted itself only to
the coherent territory of the Ukrainian people. But
the Ukrainians are also settled outside their national
territory, in numerous enclaves, which are scattered
over large parts of the globe. The largest Ukrainian
colonization is to be found in the East, i. e. in the
Don territory as far as the Volga, and in the whole
of Siberia. These territories, according to the Russian
census of 1897, are inhabited by about 1,100.000
Ukrainians. More than half a million Ukrainians are
scattered in small groups all over the United States
of America. Most of them are miners and factory-
workers, chiefly in Pennsylvania. In Canada the
Ukrainians have founded many agricultural colonies.
The number of the Ukrainians of Canada exceeds
200.000. In Brazil, too, many Ukrainian agricultural
colonies are to be found. Their population exceeds
60.000 and forms an important element of civilization
among the Lusobrazili. The Ukrainian population of
the globe can be estimated at 40 millions.

109

V. The Ukrainian National Wealth.

It results already from our preceding descriptions,
that the Ukrainian people has all the characteristic
properties of a nation, and that the coherent Ukrai-
nian territory is fit for the foundation of a large po-
litical organism.

But as the Republic of the Ukrainian People
claims to be recognized by all states at the conclusion
of peace, it shall be finally proved, that the recog-
nition of the independence of the Ukrainian state is
to the interest of Europe as well as of America. All
states, and especially the Allied Powers, have an
eminent interest that the Ukrainian national wealth
should form an object of international traffic and not,
as in the past, be withdrawn from international traffic
by the Russian Empire.

Ukraina is a country abounding in natural pro-
duce, but was not rightly valued in the past, from
a political as well as from an economical point of
view. Not only politically but also economically Ukraina
forms the connecting link between the East and the
West, and only if she is independent from Russia,
she can open her riches to the whole civilized world,
all the more since only then she can carry into effect
her intention of concluding commercial treaties on
the broadest basis with all other states.

10

The Ukrainian national wealth is large. The
country is one of the most fertile of Europe and has
an abundance of minerals of all kinds.

Agriculture is the chief occupation of the Ukrai-
nian- population, to which nearly nine tenths of the
Ukrainian people apply themselves. Three quarters of
the soil consist of humus, and also the rest of the
soil is of a rather good quality.

Next to Russia, Ukraina has the largest arable
territory in Europe : it comes up to 45 million hectares.
The arable soil of Ukraina forms 53% of the entire
surface of the country.

At the beginning of the twentieth century the total
annual agricultural produce amounted on the average
to 150 million metrical quintals, counting only the
wheat-, rye-, and barley-crops. In this respect Ukraina
exceeds all countries of Europe.

There is no doubt that this production can be
considerably increased, if Ukraina will appear as an
independent party in international trade. Modern tilling
implements and machines will at once be generally
used, if the other countries will offer the products
of their factories for sale in Ukraina. At present al-
ready farmers are paying incredible prices for agri-
cultural implements of all kinds.

Forest-culture is not very highly developed in
Ukraina.

The woodlands of Ukraina come up to about
13" „ of the entire surface of the country. The prin-
cipal cause of this small percentage is that Ukraina
comprises large parts of the steppes of Eastern Eu-
rope. It may also be found in the careless working
of the woods by the Poles and Russians. Thus for

Ill

example the wooded area of Galicia was reduced
by 2000 square kilometres, i. e. 3% of the entire
superficies of the country, in the course of the 19th
century, owing to the famous Polish misadministration.

The mountainous regions have the highest, the
steppes the lowest, percentage of forests. The Ukrai-
nian territory of North East Hungary has about 40%
forest area, in the county of Marmaros Sziget forests
form even about 62% of the superficies, on the other
hand Kursk has 7*1 %> Poltava 4*7" ',,, Kherson only
1-4%.

In forest-culture and the industrial exploitation
of forest products only a small part of the Ukrainian
people are occupied, all the more since almost all
forests of Ukraina belong to large lands-owners, to
domains of the state, and to church-land. But by
international traffic and by a reform of land laws a
reasonable forest-culture will be developed and will
open large treasures to civilization.

Still less developed is the cultivation of vege-
tables, but it will be developed, as soon as, with
the aid of foreign industrial circles, trade and commerce
will grow in the towns of Ukraina.

Fruit-culture, however, is on a fairly high level
in Ukraina, but it is sure to improve by the deve-
lopment of international traffic. The largest area is
occupied by orchards in Bessarabia (40.000 hectares).
In Podolia only the peasant's orchards cover more
than 26.000 hectares. The annual production in Podolia
and Bessarabia amounts to about 900.000 q fruit,
20.000 q nuts and almonds. The highest annual
production is attained in the Yaila Mountains m the
government of Taurida: it exceeds 160.000 q fruit and

112

40.000 q nuts. Here the most delicate sorts of apples,
pears, plums, apricots and peaches are grown.

In closest connexion with fruit culture bee-
rearing is carried on in Ukraina. The whole produce
of honey in Russian Ukraina amounted to 125.000 q
in 1910, of wax it was 13.700 # (i. e. 38% and 34%
respectively of the total produce of the whole Russian
Empire.) In Galicia the country in 1900 produced one
half of the honey and one eighth of the wax of the
total Austrian produce, i. e. 25.000 q honey and
350 # wax.

The stock of cattle is very considerable in
Ukraina. On an approximate calculation it may be
estimated to 30 millions at least, 4 millions of which
fall to the share of Austrian Ukraina. The compara-
tively smallest live stock is to be found in Galicia,
where 723 heads of cattle fall to 1000 inhabitants,
viz. 116 horses, 372 horned cattle, 60 sheep, 172 pigs
The figure is larger in Russian Ukraina, where for
instance in the government of Taurida 300 horses,
280 horned cattle, 620 sheep, 110 pigs, and in the
province of Kuban 340 horses, 540 horned cattle,
800 sheep and 210 pigs fall to 1000 inhabitants. Still
about the middle of the nineteenth century Southern
Ukraina was one of the most important wool-pro-
ducing territories on the world's market. Only since
the last decades of the 19th century the keen com-
petition of Australian wool-produce has been making
itself felt, especially from the moment when in Ukraina
part of the steppes was brought under cultivation.
Nevertheless the stock of sheep in Ukraina must be
calculated to 10 millions at least. On the whole, sheep-
breeding meets the latest requirements.

113

One of the most important means of living of the
Ukrainian peasantry is poultry-farming. The surplus
of the production over the local consumption is so
large, that the whole Ukrainian territory has for many
years past become an important country of exportation
of poultry, eggs and feathers to Russia, Austria, Ger-
many, and England. From the nine Ukrainian go-
vernments over 600.000 q of eggs were exported in
1905, more than 90% of which went over the frontier.
It may be said that the whole Ukrainian territory alone
furnishes more than one half of the produce of the
whole Russia.

Very large is the Ukrainian abundance of mi-
nerals. Gold, it is true, does not abound, but silver
is often found, especially in the Kuban and Terek
territories, where in 1910 about 300.000 q of lead
and silver ore (i. e. 73% of the total Russian output)
were raised. Mercury is profusely found in the elevated
plains of the Donetz, where in 1905 . . . 320.000 kilo-
grammes of mercury were extracted from cinnabar
ore. There are no mercury-mines in other parts of
the former Russian Empire. Very large is the output
of manganese in Ukraina: in 1907 it amounted to
about 3,245.000 q, i. e. 32% of the total Russian and
one sixth of the world's output. Greater still is the
Ukrainian abundance of iron-ore, though many
shoots are not yet explored and not yet worked. In
1907 the output of iron-ore in Ukraina amounted to
39,900.000 q, i. e. 73% of the total Russian output.
Comparatively small is the output of copper, most
of which is produced in the Caucasus, where in 1910
the whole output of copper came up to 31% of the
total output of Russia.

14

Restricting ourselves to the most important mi-
nerals, we have still to refer to the large quantities
of coal, petroleum, ozocerite, and salt, which are found
in Ukraina.

In the elevated plains of the Donetz Ukraina
possesses one of the largest coal-fields of Europe.
Its area amounts to 23.000 square kilometres and the
annual extraction in 1911 came up to 203 million
metrical quintals, i. e. 70% of the total Russian output
of coal. Here in 1911 also 31 million metrical quintals
of anthracite and nearly 34 million metrical quintals
of coke were produced.

From the above figures we can understand, that
although Ukraina takes only the seventh place in the
coal output of the globe, still in her coal she possesses
an important and indispensable resource for her in-
dustry.

As to petroleum and ozocerite, Ukraina takes
the first place in Europe. In the Carpathian Mountains
there are large oil-fields, many of which have not
yet been opened. In 1911 Galicia produced about
15 million quintals of petroleum: besides, there are
large oil-fields in the Ukrainian forelands of the Cau-
casus. Ozocerite is not produced anywhere in the
whole world except in East Galicia.

Finally the Ukrainian salt-mines are very im-
portant. In the Ukrainian part of East Galicia 540.000 q
of salt were produced in 1908. In the Donetz territory
5,000.000 quintals of rock salt were raised in 1911,
and in the Pontocaspian territory the annual output
varies between 373 and 53/4 million metrical quintals.

If after the above description the Ukrainian terri-
tory is compared with other European states, we can

115

not help counting Ukraina among the countries pro-
fusely abounding in natural riches. But since Ukraina
was no independent political organism till the present,
and could not be governed and administrated after her
own laws, official statistics concerning the financial
and economical ability of the Ukrainian people are
still wanting. Nevertheless it can be asserted with
certainty, that the Ukrainian people at present already
has all the properties necessary for a modern political
organism. The Ukrainian peasant is very modest in
his wants, has always done his public duties, and
is one of the most punctual rate-payers. During the
war he has cleared off all hypothecary debts and thus
unburdened his estate. The world juncture has made
him a rich citizen, who has also the economical
possibility of acquiring the estates of the large land-
owners by way of full compensation. An agrarian
reform of this kind is necessary in Ukraina, as was
mentioned above, and will raise the capacity of the
Ukrainian peasant for paying taxes to the highest
degree. The proceeds from the agrarian reform in
view in favour of the state as well as the effective
wealth of the Ukrainian peasant will suffice fully to
meet all financial liabilities of the Ukrainian state.
So the Allied Powers can find no better debtor than
the Ukrainian peasant, and with him the whole Ukrai-
nian state. The effective wealth of the Ukrainian people
remains indestructible, and neither trade nor commerce
were so highly developed, owing to the Russian ad-
ministration of the past, that by the war they could
have suffered any great losses. On the contrary, free
and independent Ukraina will after the war open her
door to international traffic, as soon as by the World

8*

116

Congress she is admitted into the community of free
peoples.

History proves that at the time of her political
independence Ukraina had a flourishing industry and
a wide-spread commerce (see chapter II.). Neither
the Polish nor the Russian governments took care to
encourage the development of trade and commerce:
so in this respect, too, the Ukrainian people depended
on its own strength. It created a remarkable home-
industry, which quite recently had gradually to give
way to manufacture in Ukraina as well as in the
whole Europe. On the other hand imposing syndi-
cates, consisting only of Ukrainian partners, were
formed in Ukraina, who could bear comparison with
the great trading companies of Western Europe as
to the strength of their organizations and to the ca-
pitals, which they put into circulation.

Certainly much remains to be done on the domain
of industry and commerce, but the Republic of the
Ukrainian People hopes, that the Allied Powers will
render her their assistance, all the more since it is
to their interest, to bring the products of their industry
to Ukraina and thus infinitely to expand their outlet
for export-goods.

The Republic of the Ukrainian People does not
want to seclude herself from the civilized world, as
the former Russian Empire did, but must obtain her
political independence, to pull down the barriers,
which enclosed her in the past. The re-establishment
of Russia in her former frontiers would be at the
same time the re-establishment of Russian policy,
under a new name. The psychology of the Russian
people is inconsistent with the psychology of all other

117

European peoples, and whether Bolshevism will remain
at the head of affairs in Russia, or will be succeeded
by another government, still two entirely different
views of life cannot be reconciled for any length of
time. After the re-establishment of the former Russian
Empire the Ukrainian people would not be able any
longer to form the connecting link between the East
and the West, and the barrier would have to be
erected as before. Only a free and independent Ukraina
can invite the civilized world to partake in the en-
joyment of the Ukrainian natural wealth.

' •

:

.

PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE
CARDS OR SLIPS FROM THIS POCKET

UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO LIBRARY

D

651

U6D5

Dnistrians'kyi, Stanislav

Ukraina and the Peace-
conference

J'.".','.