The Committees' Reports

The reports of the seven committees that were charged in 1791 with working out the modalities of the reforms offer a unique overview of contemporary political attitudes in Transylvania. Since the politically astute György Bánffy presided over the whole process, and since the chairmen of the working groups were all members of the government, one can gain an insight into the orientations of not only the estates but also the governing elite. To be sure, in some cases, it cannot be ascertained what specific orientations lay behind the policies that were adopted.

The problem of socage seemed the least amenable to a solution. The central and national governments had tackled the issue on three separate occasions, but there had been no progress since the Bizonyos Punctumok (Certain Points) decree. The obstacles re-mained as before: Transylvania had too many people in a state of feudal dependence. In the end, the committee ruled that a full allotment would consist of 2 to 3.4 hectares (3.5 to 6 cadastral acres) of ploughland and 0.8 to 2 hectares (1.5 to 3.5 cadastral acres) of meadow; socage was set, for villeins, a three days of manual labour, or two with draught animals, per week, and for cotters, at 25–35 days per year of manual work. Villeins were also obligated to do one long cartage, and to provide wage-labour as required. As before, the villeins had to pay tithes and make contributions in kind {2-752.} to the landowner, and their wives had to do spinning work. When the Gubernium reviewed these proposals, it ruled against compulsory wage-labour and raised the allotment to 2.8–4.3 hectares (5–7.5 cadastral acres) of ploughland, allowing for up to 5.7 hectares (ten cadastral acres) in exceptional cases, and 1.4–3.7 hectares (2.5–6.5 cadastral acres) of meadow. This recommendation was essentially endorsed by the chancellery. At the 1810–11 session of the diet, the draft plan was discussed only by a preparatory committee. The latter proposed that a full plot consist of between 2.3 and 4.6 hectares (4–8 cadastral) acres of ploughland and 1.1–2.3 hectares (2–4 cadastral acres) of meadow. It endorsed the earlier committee's recommendation for the basic work requirement, and that of the Gubernium and chancellery regarding compulsory wage-labour. Thus none of these committees and government authorities managed to resolve a muddle that dated from the 1770s.

The plan for economic development that issued from the committee process was the most comprehensive of its kind since 1751. Its principal author was Joachim Bedeus, and man of the Enlighten-ment who issued from a patrician family in Beszterce. The first part of the plan dealt with farming, which had replaced animal husbandry as the dominant sector in agriculture. The plan called for fertilization and better seed grain to increase yields; drastic measures to reduce the cultivation of corn; greater emphasis on the cultivation of potatoes, vegetables, and fruit (with active government intervention in the case of the latter); export inducements as well as protective tariffs to promote viniculture; strong measures to boost the production of flax and hemp, and more extensive cultivation of madder, anil, and 'scumpia'; government support for silkworm breeding; and raising the quality of tobacco to make it exportable.

To promote animal husbandry in general, the plan recommended irrigation, the sowing of trefoil, and the rectification of pasture boundaries. With regard to horse breeding, it wanted to make it obligatory for villeins to keep mares; foals should be {2-753.} weaned at the appropriate time, and breeds, especially the Spanish one, should be improved. For cattle, the plan recommended better methods of raising bulls, the keeping of cattle in herds, better feedstock and watering facilities, and the application of more advanced techniques for the prevention of cattle plague. For sheep, its recommendations included cross-breeding with Spanish and Paduan rams, the curtailment of transhumance, and improvements in the quality of wool. It endorsed the raising of goats, whose skins and fat were used in industry. A detailed program for the development of apiculture stressed the freedom of beekeeping and urged that, in exports, priority be given to processed over raw wax.

Other noteworthy recommendations, of relevance to agriculture, were the introduction of raft transport on the Olt River down to the Danube; the teaching of agricultural techniques in public schools; and the establishment of schools of agronomy on the Prussian model.

The plan had less to say, and that of a less innovative character, about the exploitation of mineral resources. It still considered charcoal the primary, and hard coal only a secondary source of energy for smelters. It recommended support for private initiatives by landowners to develop iron mines, smelters, and glassworks, and state backing for a natural sciences society that would conduct research into Transylvania's mineral resources and plant life.

With regard to the industrial sector, the plan devoted separate attention to handicrafts and to manufacturing. Guilds should be preserved, unaffiliated craftsmen should be encouraged to join guilds or have controls imposed on them, the number of craftsmen should be trimmed to the requirements of the market, and the right of certain guilds to preemptive purchase should be curtailed. The committee considered unfeasible the proposal, made in 1751, for a separation of crafts from farming activity. It recommended that joint stock companies be formed for the establishment of factories and smaller manufacturing enterprises, and deplored the potentially {2-754.} monopolistic practice of granting rights to establish factories. The committee took a stand opposite to that of the Commissio Commercialis when it recommended the development in Transylvania of facilities to manufacture goods that presently had to be imported, and especially factories that would introduce the latest techniques and technology. Those proposing to found manufacturing enterprises should be assisted in finding buildings or building-plots and an assured source of manpower, and be granted tariff concessions.

With regard to external trade, the plan — whose various parts were not fully harmonized — focused on the problem of the sizeable deficit. The proposed remedies included controls on the import of luxury goods; the achievement of a positive trade balance with regard to agricultural products; the curtailment of transhumance (and thus the retention in Transylvania of grazing fees); and import duties on livestock and fish. To promote the cotton industry, the committee proposed to reduce the price of, and import duties on raw cotton, and to raise the tariffs on cotton goods from the hereditary provinces. It wanted to encourage the cultivation of hemp and the production in workhouses of wool yarn; to remove controls on textile manufacturing; to provide loans for Gallarati's silk factory; and to assist textile dyers and tanners. The committee urged support for the development of scythe production at Vajdahunyad; the establishment of new, export-oriented glass manufactures; the exportation of stoneware to the Ottoman lands; and the proposal of a Viennese merchant to supply sugar or establish a sugar plant in Transylvania.

The third part of the economics plan dealt with domestic trade, and it followed the approach taken in 1771 by the Commissio Commercialis. The committee proposed to reduce the number of merchants (especially Armenian traders) and to have these selected from among people active in industry; it wanted to shift Armenians and Greeks to the industrial sector, and to restrict the Greeks to the wholesale trade in Turkish goods. These measures were intended to {2-755.} stimulate foreign trade. The fourth section of the plan addressed the administration of trade and commerce. Noting the negative experiences at the time of the Commissio Commercialis' operation, the committee recommended the creation of an advisory agency and an expansion of the commercial sector. On tariff policy, the committee proposed restoration of a customs border with Hungary and the im-position of substantial protective duties on imports. The committee had little to say about roadworks and shipping.

This Commerciale plan offered the best overview of Transylvania's economy in many a day. Its most positive feature was a recognition that the chief remedy to the country's economic problems lay in increasing the production of goods; the industrial policy advocated by the committee stood in sharp contrast to that proposed in 1771. However, since the plan focused on Transylvania (protective tariffs, growth in domestic output), the central government was bound to find it unacceptable.

The committee that dealt with public administration had little to offer on the central issue of structure and organization. Since the territorial boundaries of the 'nations' were regarded as unalterable, the committee could not develop a comprehensive reform of the administrative structure. It contented itself with a few minor recommendations, for the amalgamation of some small districts or their annexation to larger ones, and for some purely local revision of boundaries. The committee did propose to harmonize (with some variations in nomenclature) the administrative systems of the Hungarian and Székely regions; it left the matter of the Saxon districts to the government, which was in the process of issuing a series of new regulations concerning the Királyföld.

György Bánffy inspired the weighty recommendations on public and personal security, which aimed, in the spirit of enlightened absolutism, to prevent local authorities from undermining the authority of the Gubernium. To deal with potential opposition, the committee proposed simplified legal procedures and, at the limit, {2-756.} military intervention. Similar measures were recommended with regard to villeins who disobeyed their landlords; the committee stressed the importance of preventing conflict, but it considered (in obvious evocation of the 1784 rebellion) that if forceful measures became unavoidable, they should be applied in a decisive manner. The proposals regarding other sources of disorder were also in-spired, in the main, by the ideas of the Enlightenment. Prevention and moral education were the best remedies for anti-social behaviour; prostitutes and the down-and-out should be assigned to workhouses. The plan vividly reflected the social character as well as the enlightened and absolutist dimensions of Josephinism.

A few additional aspects of this committee's work deserve mention. For domestic service, it recommended explicit contractual regulations, complete with a detailed list of duties, sanctions for refusal to work, and some protection of the servants' rights. A separate report dealt with regulation of the situation of Jews. In the spirit of Josephinism, it proposed abolition of their special legal status. Jewish villagers should be treated as cotters. Jews should be allowed to choose freely between farming, industry, and commerce, but prohibited from leasing taverns. The Jewish 'company' at Gyulafehérvár should be dissolved and the secular authority of rabbis suspended; Jews should be compelled to adopt the language and dress of their locality. They should be free to attend Christian schools, and — with the Gubernium's permission — to build synagogues and schools.

The Gypsies presented a more difficult problem. The committee endorsed a regulation, dating from 1784, according to which Gypsy gold-washers could migrate only in the period of the wash, and then only under supervision. With regard to other Gypsies under the authority of the Treasury, the committee endorsed the government's 1783 provision that they should be settled on crown lands or 'sold' to private landowners who would settle them. The committee recommended that non-Treasury Gypsies be settled on {2-757.} the land as well. By peaceful measures, and without affront to their talent for crafts and music, they should be induced to assimilate and take up farming. Gypsies who had no occupation or who refused to give up an itinerant lifestyle should be expelled from the country.

On public health, an outstanding and up-to-date report laid stress on the importance of prevention with respect to both human and animal diseases. The committee called for measures to reduce air and water pollution and prevent the contamination of food products. It proposed that all hospitals be placed under interdenominational administration, that hospitals be established at the county level for the treatment of venereal disease, and that the public be educated in the control of animal disease.

The committee on fiscal and statistical affairs had few innovative ideas with regard to taxation. It recommended that taxes be levied on the individual's wealth, and not on the size of his landed property. The target for tax revenues should be tailored to be country's needs and the taxpayers' capacity; the tax rates should be differentiated to stimulate productive work. Beyond these generalities, the committee offered no significant proposals for reforming the tax system and modifying the exempt status of Church nobles, armalists, or Székely lófős and infantrymen.

There was similarly little novelty in the report of the committee that dealt with other aspects of Treasury affairs. The question of free domestic trade in salt was not addressed in the relevant section of the report on the Cameralia. The report merely affirmed that the salt-cutters' productivity could be raised by half and that the administration of salt affairs could be streamlined. The committee found no reason to change the administration of the thirtieths tax; it proposed that, in the Királyföld, the larger tithe be uniform and payable in kind, and the smaller tithe be payable in cash. It endorsed the recommendation of the draft bill of 1791 that the Treasury cease to be autonomous, and that the treasurer be made responsible to the Gubernium. With respect to the mining sector, {2-758.} the most significant recommendation was to free private mines for Treasury supervision — an idea that the central government promptly rejected.

The proposals of the judiciary committee were more impressive. Those dealing with judicial reform and with the criminal code bore the imprint of László Türi's excellent ideas. This outstanding opposition figure devised a three-tier judicial system to replace the overly-complicated structure set up at the time of Joseph II. His masterfully elegant scheme had the merit of assuaging the estates' chronic fear for their rights: it left the manorial courts in place but put them under county supervision. The proposal called for a single type of district court, with a permanent seat, and for the clear separation at this level of the administrative and judicial spheres; a few assessors would participate in the process (a carryover from the practice of the continua tabulae, though the assessors would now be elected), and the court would remain in session for the entire legislative period. Türi's judicial proposal for towns and market towns that had their own courts was equally astute; without challenging their traditional rights, he applied the three-tier principle in their case as well. (The Saxon 'nation' distanced itself from any reform of the judiciary.) At the national level, Türi proposed to retain two courts: the royal court of appeal and, and the second level, the Gubernium in the capacity of forum superrevisorium. Thus Türi cleverly reconciled the demand, based on the Diploma Leopoldinum, of the estates with the practice that had become established during the reign of Joseph II. There could be no appeal to the chancellery. In Türi's scheme, the diet's judicial function would be limited to hearing appeals against rulings brought by the royal court in cases of disloyalty. Of the treasury courts, only the mining court of Zalatna would be preserved. Evoking the experience in the time of Joseph II, Türi proposed that secular law courts once again be made responsible for hearing matrimonial cases. In the sphere of judicial procedure, the committee recommended that the official language {2-759.} be Hungarian (or, in the Saxon districts, German); that so-called simple complaints be dealt with at one hearing, and not individually; and that commoners be allowed to serve as defence lawyers.

In his attempt to reform the criminal code, Türi had to contend with constraints similar to those that applied to the judiciary, and also with the changes in the political situation since 1794. His starting point was the 'old' Transylvanian criminal code, but he also incorporated the most positive features of the 1787 code and thus fashioned a more differentiated and precise set of prescriptions; he offered a more accurate definition of cases in which irresponsibility or criminal intent might warrant prosecution, as well as of mitigating and aggravating circumstances. Only opinions that attacked the state, religion, or morality, could make their author liable to prosecution.

Türi's code, like that of 1787, distinguished between premeditated and other crimes. Capital punishment was retained only for the most serious crimes: murder or attempted manslaughter, and acts of treason against king or country. A realistic appraisal of prison conditions in Transylvania made Türi regard a three-year jail sentence as bordering on a death sentence. Acts of disrespect to God were punishable, but severe penalties were reserved for outright denials of God or antireligious activism, and for witchcraft (which misled ignorant people). With regard to anti-state crimes, the definition of nota was modified: acts aiming to undermine the existence, structure, and constitution of the state were tantamount to disloyalty and still incurred a death sentence, but acts that, according to prevailing notions, did not involve disloyalty (such as the forging of documents or currency) were excluded, and most other anti-state acts would invite comparatively mild punishment. Generally, homicide was punishable by death; when it occurred as the consequence of some collective action, such as rioting, the culprits were to be broken on the wheel. Suicide was treated much as in the 1787 code.

{2-760.} The conditions prevailing in Transylvania inspired Türi to propose harsh sentences for property crimes. Robbery incurred the death sentence, as did arson and harbouring criminals; common theft was to be treated more leniently, and sacrilegious theft did not incur higher penalties. Türi had to bend to the spirit of the times in recommending severe punishment of offenses against public morality, i.e. spoken or written attacks on the monarch, the diet, or government agencies; otherwise, only certain acts of immorality in-curred heavy sanctions. The possibility of appeal through the royal court to the Gubernium was reserved essentially for cases in which the sentence was execution or long imprisonment; and only in the case of confirmed death sentences could appeals for clemency be addressed to the monarch. A sentence of less than three months' imprisonment, or the equivalent, could not be appealed even to the royal court. Limitation, a notion ignored in the 1787 code, was set at twelve years for crimes that incurred the death sentence, and six years for other crimes.

In the main, Türi's proposed criminal code was as enlightened that of 1787. Where it regressed from the latter, the fault lay in the constraints of the period and not in the author. The new code could have been applied in Transylvania with much greater ease than was the case with its predecessor.

The principal challenge facing the committee on religious affairs was to find answers to questions raised by the Supplex Libellus Valachorum and left unresolved, notably the education of Romanians. It also had to deal with the interdenominational debates and grievances that remained unresolved after 1791. Most of the complaints had been directed at the Catholic Church, but Bishop Ignác Batthyány, a leading champion of Catholic restoration, chose to ignore them, and György Bánffy did not want to stir up more interdenominational conflict for the sake of the principal aggrieved group, the Unitarians. The committee recommended that each de-nomination be free to negotiate its clergy's emoluments, and generally {2-761.} endorsed existing privileges, but it barred Romanian priests from sharing in tithes and deplored the extension of the canonica portio to the Uniate priests. With regard to the cultural development of Romanians, the Saxons, and particularly Gubernium councillor Michael Soterius, adopted a rigid and paternalistic position. They called for strict rules to govern dress and home-building, the imposition of certain Saxon institutions in Romanian villages, compulsory assimilation, and the 'reform' of the Romanians' various forms of entertainment (including proscription of outlaw ballads). The jurist Mózes Bartha, a Unitarian municipal councillor from Kolozsvár, favoured education, both general (including the Hungarian language) and trade-oriented, and a reform of the Romanian Church. Both Bánffy and his brother-in-law, the Josephinist committee chairman János Esterházy stressed the importance of education, though more for its civic than for its cultural benefits. They were particularly concerned with improving the educational level of the Romanian clergy, and their approach carried the day. The committee — which did not include a single Romanian — never got around to addressing the policy issue of a Romanian nation in Transylvania, nor to entertain the thought that it might debate the issue with the Romanians. After the various levels of government had sifted through the report, it was reduced to a single proposal, for the establishment of a seminary for Orthodox priests and teachers.

The committee on educational affairs was charged with devising a wholesale reform of the public system. Back in spring 1791, a team led by Ádám Teleki had drafted an educational reform on behalf of the Calvinists, and thus the committee's report became part of a competitive exercise between Catholic-based, enlightened absolutism and the Protestant Enlightenment. The author is believed to be József Pákei, the leading figure among Transylvania's Unitarians and one of the first Hungarian followers of Kant. The report endorsed the autonomy of the various denominations in matters of education but, at the same time, aimed to bring about a {2-762.} unified and enlightened school system. Its spirit is reflected in the opening line of the section on the education of peasants — 'peasants are human beings' — even if this liberal outlook subsequently suffers from some qualification.[22]22. Synopsis Systematis generalis Scholarum publicarum M. Princi-patus Transylvaniae (n.p., n.d.) The committee stressed the necessity of helping the children of poor peasants and ordinary citizens to obtain an education; proposed that classes be established in urban public schools for ordinary citizens intent on pursuing a career in commerce and industry; and defended — with qualifications — academic freedom, affirming that the development of knowledge was a permanent process. The report was innovative in proposing a program in engineering; it also called for improvements in the training of physicians, surgeons, and pharmacists, and for the establishment of an art academy. On the whole, the recommendations went be-yond the educational program of enlightened absolutism.

In endorsing the proposal for a Transylvanian–Hungarian Philological Society, the committee warned against an overly-aggressive propagation of the Hungarian language and recommended that Saxons be invited to join the Society. The report on censorship was crafted by György Bánffy himself. Noting that the committee was disposed to debate the very need for censorship, he proceeded, with uncharacteristic abruptness, to take the issue in hand and produce a draft that retained many elements of Josephinism. Bánffy did defend the right to intellectual freedom of the more cultured, notabilior stratum, whose members would be allowed to procure from abroad, for their personal use, a couple of copies of any published work.

The attitudes of Transylvania's political elite are clearly reflected in the work produced by the seven committees. The reports variously reveal immobilism with regard to socage; progressive but politically unrealistic proposals in the field of economics; a vacuous approach to taxation and treasury affairs, and the same, mixed with Josephinism, to public administration; the mark of a great and enlightened jurist — and the retrograde impact of the {2-763.} 1790s — on law reform; an Enlightment-inspired — and therefore politically insensitive — response to the national aspirations of Romanians; and some modest improvements to the educational system fashioned by enlightened absolutism.