Le Nord : revue internationale des Pays de Nord - 01.06.1938, Page 177

THE BIRTH OF A NATION
167
pression was »passive resistance«, the sole purpose of which was
to restore her constitutional rights. But the strength of this resis-
tance lay in its great support from all ranks of the people, sup-
port which showed itself in the »Great Address« of 1899, and
again a few years later in the refusal of entire provinces to parti-
cipate in illegal conscription after Finland’s legal army had been
disbanded for its patriotism. The sole bright spot in this sorrow-
ful history was the Great Strike which occurred in Russia in
October-November 1905, during the Russo-Japanese War and
which gave rise to similar events in Finland. The »October Mani-
festo« restored legal conditions to Finland and put into effect the
reform urgently demanded by the majority of the people, viz.,
the changing of the old four-chamber House of Representatives
into a single-chamber parliament elected by general franchise
(1906). This great and far-reaching reform was nevertheless
without practical value, as within a very few years, a new re-
actionary policy was introduced and the Russian oppression made
its reappearance in an even more intensified form, despite the
repeated protests of the Finnish parliament.
The fate of Finland was not, however, to be decided by
oppressor and oppressed alone, for the Great War swept both
into its whirlpool. Finland was then in a very peculiar position:
although part of the Russian State, in reality she took no part
in the War. Owing to the position arising out of the political
struggle with Russia, Finland was not required to place an army
at the disposal of Russia — that advantage at any rate was a
result of the »passive resistance.« Finland’s position during the
War was therefore one of semi-neutrality.
As the length and magnitude of the War began to be realised,
however, it was impossible to remain indifferent to its influence
on the destiny of Finland. Certain people in this country in-
stinctively felt that if Russia were to sustain a crushing defeat,
Finland would be freed from the connection; others, on the other
hand, were of the opinion that a German victory would be as
dangerous as a Russian. All parties in Finland nevertheless agreed
that, whatever occurred, Finland’s rights and government insti-
tutions must be defended.
In certain youthful, particularly university, circles, the feel-
ing was prevalent that passive resistance was ineffective against
Russia and that a courageous, active policy would yield better
results in all circumstances. With this aim in view, numbers of