Page:The Bohemian Review, vol1, 1917.djvu/39

 tivity. Proof of Kramar’s influence in the “Národní Listy” are above all three articles, dated August 4, 1914, January 1, 1915 and April 6, 1915. In them Kramar is full of enthusiasm over the liberation of small nations which victory of the entente is expected to bring, whereby the nation will awake out of darkness and humiliation toward new life. The Bohemian nation will through its strength, unity and organization flourish anew after the catastrophe which this war will bring about.

The manner in which this newspaper was conducted for some time after the outbreak of the war was hostile to the monarchy in other ways also. Display of news favorable to our enemies, praise of their political and economic condition, pessimism over conditions in our monarchy, veiled admonitions to passive resistance with reference to war needs, especially the first two war loans, colored the contents of this newspaper.

3. An issue of “La Nation Tchèque”, a periodical published in France, contains numerous articles which set forth at length in the most objectionable manner the ideas and aims of the treasonable propaganda. This newspaper, shedding a clear light on the program of Kramar and those who agree with him, was found in Kramar’s pocket at the time of his arrest, and his excuse that the pages were not cut and that he did not know the contents was found to be false. The publisher of “La Nation Tchèque” is Professor Denis, a friend of Kramar, formerly a contributor to the “Národní Listy.” Other foreign printed matter of similar contents was found among Kramar’s effects, so especially Bohemian translation of two articles from the “London Times” of a similar tendency.

4. A serious indication that Kramar was guilty of criminal acts is his secret conversation with the Italian consul in a Prague hotel in April 1915 shortly before Italy declared war.

5. In the draft of a letter addressed to Governor Prince Thun found among Kramar’s papers Kramar stated explicitly that faithful to his political principles he was bound to avoid everything that would look like approval of the present war, and that his own attitude and the attitude of the “Národní Listy” toward the war loans was governed by this view.

The court is convinced that this conduct of the defendants is responsible for unfortunate occurrences which were committed by a part of the Bohemian people and placed serious obstacles in the way of successful prosecution of the war. In this respect we must mention the distribution of treasonable Russian proclamations in Bohemia and Moravia, expressions of sympathy for the enemy, frequent criminal prosecutions for political offences, failure of the plan to have the Bohemian deputies declare their loyalty at the beginning of the war, for which Kramar as leader of the representatives of the Bohemian people must be held primarily responsible; slight participation by population of the Czech race in the first two war loans, in the war collection of metals and collections for the Red Cross; organization of Czech volunteer legions in hostile lands; conduct of some Bohemian prisoners of war in enemy countries which ignored their duties and comradeship; unreliability of soldiers in certain parts of the army resulting in repeated voluntary surrenders to the enemy; insubordination of many Bohemian regiments both at the front and in garrison which were dangerous to the state and grossly violated all discipline, as a result of which military operations were seriously damaged and the enemy was enabled to gain successes. All this is in the opinion of the court the fruit of the agitation carried on for many years by Kramar and Rasin, and strengthens the case against them. The activities of the two defendants aimed at forcible territorial changes of the empire; they increased external danger and incited to insurrection in the interior (against par. 58c and 59b, Cr. Code); they tended to undermine our military power and caused serious losses, in violation of par. 32 of Military Code, constituting the crime against the war power of the state.

With reference to the defendants Zamazal and Cervinka the judgment found that Zamazal has been for years a Russophil and entertained ideas hostile to the state and that immediately after war broke out he undertook to spy out facts of military importance relating to the defense of the state and the plans of the army. For that purpose he collected with the help of sufficient expert knowledge reports and observations of military and strategical events and communicated them not only to individuals, but also to editors of papers, chiefly the “Národní Listy”. With the same aim in view he undertook two trips into the zone of operations, until arrested on suspicion of espionage.