Then Istvan Bethlen, who was presiding, decided to adjourn the meeting for a short while so as to give himself a chance to talk it over with Abady in private. Bethlen well understood the implications of what Balint had proposed and agreed with everything he had said. Nevertheless, seeing the mood of those who disagreed, he advised Balint to drop any specific details concerning the actual proposed law lest further discussion should bring about the disruption of the meeting and thus bring the movement to a halt before it had even got under way. He proposed that Abady’s text should be allowed to stand as it was, in general terms, but that discussion of the details of the proposed minority law should be left until later, it being understood that when the movement was firmly established the matter could then be brought up again and the introduction of the law openly demanded.

Abady was reluctant to agree, but could see no alternative. As a result his amended speech was read at the general session of the conference which was held at the county head-quarters the following day. His proposals were accepted unanimously by the thirty-odd delegates, who included Under-Secretaries of State, prefects, MPs and other elected officials in the presence of an exceptionally large audience. Everything of real importance was contained in the section of the speech entitled ‘To all the Peoples of Transylvania’. After a short introduction, during which he referred to the forthcoming elections, he said:

‘Now is the time when we should all stand together, regardless of party, in all matters which affect our native land and which affect our peaceful existence now and in the future. It is time to put an end to that harmful situation where decisions affecting us are taken without our being consulted. That is all wrong. We no longer ask, we demand, that our special conditions should be taken into account in all law-making that concerns us. Finally we must have our say in all affairs that concern the well-being of our own homeland.

‘This demand is justified historically. When Transylvania was made an integral part of the kingdom we surrendered unselfishly the autonomy we had known for centuries and refrained from imposing any conditions in return. We did not stop to worry about the possible loss of material or personal advantages which had been part and parcel of our inherited independence. But … but this patriotic selflessness merits the quid pro quo that the central government should show as much special understanding, love and consideration for intrinsically Transylvanian matters as we would have shown ourselves. This is their moral obligation, but today there is no sign of it … unfortunately.

‘It is unfortunate, too, that with very few exceptions we have found ourselves treated as unwanted step-children so often are, disregarded, ignored, not worth bothering about! And if they do for once take a casual glance at the many complicated issues of which our society is composed, and the problems these entail, no one tries to understand what it is all about.

‘We suffer deeply from this indifference and ignorance. In particular we are forced to witness the degradation of our ethnic minorities, the destruction of our middle class and the continual recession in our industry and commerce.

‘A national policy that is as uncaring as it is ignorant as regards our minority problems is now increasingly provoking dangerously irredentist and seditious tendencies, tendencies which can be justified as provoked by unfair treatment. We must say outright that for centuries in Transylvania people have lived happily together regardless of race or creed or language and that to do this we need more than manufactured opinions and slogans borrowed from other lands and other peoples. These merely inject poison into our system.

‘With full knowledge of our own national circumstances, and in the interests of all Hungary, it is clear that we must eliminate those walls of mistrust which otherwise divide us. We must tear down those artificial barriers which separate our peoples; we must disregard all difference of language and religion, and above all we must strive to ensure that there is trust, mutual trust, between the ruler and the ruled. Everybody who is or wishes to be at home in this country must be welcomed and made to feel at home with confidence that nowhere will he find any form of discrimination, for that will never bring peace and ease and prosperity to our land. No administration can achieve anything without consultation and mutual trust.

‘In making these considerations the basis for our demands we offer a friendly hand to anyone who, regardless of race or language or religion, desires to work for the peaceful evolution of our land.’

This ended what Balint had to say about the question of the minorities. Then he tackled the subject of economics:

‘We demand that the central government fulfils its moral obligations towards us and that firstly this is shown by a just investment in Transylvania’s cultural and material welfare. At present everything goes to Budapest and nothing comes back.

‘Almost nothing is initiated nationally to encourage our commerce, though in the last ten years commissions dealing with Szekler and forestry matters have been notable exceptions. However, the artificial separation of our economy from that of the rest of the country has resulted in stagnation and idleness. All the profit of our rich mineral deposits, our mines, forests, power-stations – as well as the accumulated receipts from high taxation – in no way returns home to benefit our own land or its inhabitants.

‘It is time, therefore, to call an end to fruitless begging and dreary complaint. We must make it clear that only by acceding to our demands can the country safeguard the future of the average landowner and ensure that a prosperous middle class can be firmly established. For the prosperity of all we must encourage the building up of small and medium-sized agricultural estates, regardless of the creed and nationality of the landowner. It is on this that the advancement of our social and cultural order depends and, above all, it is upon this that the life and dignity of our agricultural population depends. Our peoples must have the liberty and the right not only to work and earn their daily bread but also to own land and gain respect and prosperity as equal citizens of the same country.

‘We must have our fair share of the implements of commerce and industry, and so we demand from the national railways, which until now have only served our country in a derisively feeble fashion, that services are introduced that are worthy of the real importance of our land.