From November 1918, the Collegium was in a rather difficult financial position, which the management tried to resolve with loans. Although the institute was granted the requested 50,000 crowns, it was not enough to consolidate its budget due to the rapidly rising infla-tion. The District I People’s Guard in Kelenföld imposed a 1,000-crown tax a month on the Collegium in order to cover its operating expenses during the period of the Hungarian Soviet Republic , which made the situation of the institute even more difficult.565 After the fall of the dictatorship, the institute was close to bankruptcy, because 75% of the funds allocated for its operation were collected in banknotes that were devalued after 15 August 1919, causing a loss of 15,000 crowns. Consequently, the director applied to the ministry immediately for an additional loan of 18,000 crowns566 and then another two loans of 50,000 crowns each in October and December 1919.567568 Thus, due to the grave financial position, the ministry had to allocate a 168,000-crown extraordinary grant to the institution’s budget in the grave economic situation.
The budge of the Collegium was not stabilised in the subsequent year either and therefore in April 1920, Bartoniek applied for another 80,000 crowns of additional loan.569 Although the ministry generally fulfilled these requests, in order to avoid bankruptcy, it assigned financial supervisors to the Collegium in June 1920 to review the budget. The inspection was concluded with a settlement deficit, in explanation for which the director stated that József Rüblein, the financial controller deceased in 1919, took the books home due to his illness and therefore no settlement was prepared about the expenses of the Collegium for four months. Although the inspectors proved that the budget deficit matched the amount accumulated due to the lack of accounting for four months, from that time the relationship
565 Bartoniek objected to the special tax, but the Treasury Legal Directorate found the People’s Guard proce-dure fair and justified. 7959/V. Letter by the Hungarian Treasury Legal Directorate to the Public Education Commissioner’s Office. Budapest, 26 March 1919. MNL OL K 636. box 49, item 25 (1919).
566 83/1919. Submission by Géza Bartoniek for the 18,000-crown additional loan. Budapest, 20 August 1919.
MNL OL K 636. box 85, item 25 lot, 79 (1920).
567 94/1919. Submission by Géza Bartoniek for the 50,000-crown additional loan. Budapest, 8 October 1919.
MNL OL K 636. box 85, item 25, lot 79 (1920).
568 117/1919. Submission by Géza Bartoniek for the approval of another 50,000-crown additional loan. Budapest, 29 December 1919. MNL OL 636. box 85, item 25, lot 79 (1920).
569 43/1920. Submission by Géza Bartoniek to the MRPE Minister for an 80,000-crown additional loan. Budapest, 28 April 1920. MNL OL K 592. lot 143, item 18 (1920).
160
7. The History of the Eötvös Collegium Between 1919 and 1927 7. The History of the Eötvös Collegium Between 1919 and 1927
between the MRPE and the institute fundamentally changed compared to what it had been before.570
As indicated in Chapter 6.5, apart from maintaining financial stability, the institute also had to face the risks that occurred during the period of the Hungarian Soviet Republic . József Balassa started negotiations with the ministry on the establishment of a Secondary Teacher Training Institution and the introduction of a new teacher training system in December 1918. The institution was established during the period of the Hungarian Soviet Republic and Balassa was appointed as its leader. The Public Education Commission-er’s Office reviewed the Budapest institutes, also including the Collegium in April 1919.
Bartoniek fulfilled the reporting obligation only in part, because he did not provide the list of names or positions of students or staff of the Collegium, although it was required under the decree and instead mentioned that the institute functioned with 100 people and 5 teachers and therefore it did not have any vacant flat or bed.571 However, by July 1919, the Public Education Commissioner’s Office made a decision regarding the fate of the institute: deputy commissioner György Lukács merged the institute into the Secondary Teacher Training Institution . According to the decree, the commissioner reallocated some of the Collegium’s teachers as the staff of the new teacher training institution. Essentially, this amounted to the dissolution of the institute, as its educational autonomy and teaching staff were withdrawn by the supervisory authority.572
However, the termination could not be carried out in full. This was partly attributable to the unclear public conditions and partly to the activities of Béla Balázs and Lajos Nagy.
The former, in the capacity of head of the Department of Literature and Art of the Public Education Commissoner’s Office, presumably took substantial steps to decelerate the imple-mentation of the measure.573 The latter, in his capacity as a member of the Collegium’s Directory protested against the accommodation of Red Army soldiers in the institution by the Public Education Commissioner’s Office.574 According to Domokos Kosáry, the Colle-gium ultimately conserved its independence, but was renamed Lenin College (Domokos
570 Due to the fault, Bartoniek considered it necessary to appoint Pál Lukcsics to the institute to manage the finances and reduce the administrative burden of the director. 57/1920. Report by the director of the Báró Eötvös József Collegium on the transfer and acceptance of the duties of the financial and audit controller of the institute. Budapest, 10 June 1920. MNL OL K 592. lot 143, item 18 (1920).
571 42/1919. Report by Géza Bartoniek for the Students’ Social Department of the Public Education Commis-sioner’s Office Budapest, April 23 1919. MDKL box 50, file 96/3.
572 “While leaving the organisation and management of the institute intact, the Eötvös Collegium is merged with the Secondary Teacher Training Institution for the purposes of secondary teacher training and members of the collegium’s teaching staff whose work the Institution will use for performing its own tasks are allocated to the corresponding staff of the Institution named. For the purposes of information, I notify the management about this by instructing it to contact the management of the said Institution in order to discuss the specific measures to be taken to implement the merger and staff unification by the directorate of the Institution and proposals.” Department 159.085 VI/. 1. Deputy commissioner György Lukács on the matter of the merger of the Eötvös Collegium. Budapest, July 14, 1919.
MNL OL K 636. box 49, item 25 (1919).
573 Béla Balázs , originally named Herbert Bauer, was a member of the institute, studying Hungarian and German, between 1902 and 1906 (MDKL box 1, file 2, lot 3).
574 Lajos Nagy was a student of Latin and history at the Collegium between 1915 and 1922. He became an elected officer of the Directory, the institution’s organisation of confidence, in March 1919. (MDKL box 14, file 14, lot 41).
161
7.5. Relationship Between the Eötvös Collegium and the MRPE as Supervisory Authority 7.5. Relationship Between the Eötvös Collegium and the MRPE as Supervisory Authority
Kosáry 1989: 27). No archive sources are available concerning the restoration of autonomy and the institute’s new name was not confirmed officially. Lenin College was not an official denomination and came presumably from Árpád Haász who was the head of the Student Welfare Department of the Public Education Commissioner’s Office.575
In the second half of 1919, all measures of the dictatorship of the proletariat were nullified, so that the institute also recovered its independence and, having dismissed József Balassa , the ministry abandoned the shift to the new regime of teacher training. Nevertheless, the Collegium’s operation was still in jeopardy, as the officers’ detachment of the National Army seized a part of its premises for military purposes in September 1919. The military forces put a great burden on the budget of the institute, which suffered from financial problems as it was, requiring constant heating and lighting in the residence rooms occupied by them and the large dining hall, in addition to which their increased number disturbed the scientific education that took off slowly. This is why Bartoniek first requested compensation from the headquarters of the military in November,576 and notified the officers’ detachment to leave in the first half of December.577 The ministry also agreed, after a new military contingent expressed an intention to establish its quarters at Ménesi Road on 8 December 1919.578 Upon the intervention of state secretary Lajos Tóth, the Headquarters of the National Army confirmed that the premises of the Collegium may not be seized for military purposes.579
Though the soldiers left in the course of January 1920, relations between the institute and the MRPE grew chilly due to budget problems. This is demonstrated by the fact that the minister was not invited to the Te Deum held on the 25th anniversary of the Collegium held in the Lazarist church opposite the institute. Mass was celebrated by Imre Szerecz, a teacher from the Premonstratensians of Keszthely, with the assistance of two prebends from the same order who were former students of the Collegium. After the ceremony, a commemorative service was held in the auditorium about the foundation of the institute and war heroes. After the event was published in the press, Bartoniek explained his failure to serve an invitation with the familial atmosphere and the shortage of space. At the same time, he suggested it would be fortunate to organise a separate memorial service for the
575 “I am not aware of that ugly offence of being named after Lenin, or rather, I have heard the name being used in prac-tice, but have not imagined an official document having been issued for this purpose. If one has been issued, this must have been committed by Árpád Haas and his fellows.” Letter from ministerial secretary Károly Mészáros to Géza Bartoniek. 12 September, 1919. MDKL box 88, file 185/5.
576 104/1919. Letter from Géza Bartoniek to the Headquarters of the Officers’ Detachment of District I of Budapest. Budapest, 26 November 26, 1919. MDKL box 88, file 185/4.
577 109/1919. Letter from Géza Bartoniek to the Headquarters of the Officers’ Detachment of District I of Budapest. Budapest, 10 December 1919. MDKL box 88, file 185/4.
578 Three squads of a company, accompanied by an officer, turned up at the Collegium on 8 December 1919. They instructed me to present the premises of the Collegium to them, which they, as an officers’ detachment (in Palace hotel), wished to use. I notified them that all premises of the Collegium are in use and could therefore not be handed over to the squads. In reaction, (the younger officers of the) squad became aggressive: »We did not come to dispute. This place needs appropriate inhabitants.« To which I answered: I cannot cancel the premises now. [...] I will make every effort to prevent them from settling in here. The next day, I went to the ministry of public education and got state secretary Lajos Tóth to obtain a letter from the minister to chief commander Horthy.” Memorandum by Géza Bartoniek about the events of 8 December 1919. MDKL box 50, file 96/4.
579 5573/1919. Certificate of the Headquarters of the Hungarian National Army for Géza Bartoniek . Budapest, 13 December 1919. MDKL box 50, file 96/4.
162
7. The History of the Eötvös Collegium Between 1919 and 1927 7. The History of the Eötvös Collegium Between 1919 and 1927
commencement of the Collegium’s actual operation and the 25-year anniversary of the first students moving in for 21 September 1920, to which he would be happy to welcome the minister as well.580
The celebration did not come to pass, whereas the ministry decided to invite Pál Teleki to fill the position of curator. Relations between the MRPE and the Collegium reached a stalemate due to the unexpected retirement of the director and the proposal for the new curator moved the parties out of the deadlock.581 The Former Members’ Association was set up as a result of this crisis on 3 July 1921, one of the main goals of which was to afford protection for the institute in public life by swinging their social weight. The organisation was also registered by the Ministry of Interior, its first president was Zoltán Gombocz and its work was assisted by János Horváth as vice president, Miklós Szabó as notary and Pál Lukcsics as “steward”, that is, financial supervisor (Domokos Kosáry 1989:29). The organisation, which assembled at least once a year, kept records of the alumni and regularly informed them about the affairs of the Collegium by issuing Association Booklets.582
After clarifying the issues related to the person of the director, curator Pál Teleki proposed an amendment to the Organisational Rules, as the original rules of 1895 were intended only as temporary. The curator believed that the original rules had lived up to the hopes attached to them, but some of its stipulations had worn out and therefore needed to be amended.
The new rules were adopted at the curator’s meeting (teachers’ meeting with the curator’s participation) held on 1 July 1921 and took their final form after several rounds of propos-als.583 Save for two exceptions, the bulk of the changes involved style or clarified the tasks of students and teachers compared to the earlier version. However, section II.2 contained a substantial change: the 1895 rules merely stated that the curator’s task was to exercise supervision in all respects as the minister’s delegate. The new rules added that the curator had the exclusive right to make proposals concerning all academic and personal matters.
This amendment was probably included in the document in the wake of the retirement of the director, as the issue was settled by the curator along similar arguments. The other substantial change took place in section III.4: the original rules provided for the temporary employment of teachers, which was amended to the effect that the Collegium’s system of scientific education was to be led by the teaching staff appointed by the minister and lecturers invited on a temporary basis as necessary.584 The curator did not wish to amend the disciplinary rules. In the proposal, it was also noted that the affairs of the institute had
580 Report 64/1920. by Géza Bartoniek concerning the celebration held to commemorate the 25th academic year of the Báró Eötvös József Collegium. Budapest, July 9, 1920. MNL OL K 592. lot 143, item 18 (1920).
581 The crisis was also reported by the magazine titled “Nép” (“People”) (MDKL box 89, file 185/a).
582 In addition to protection in public life, a goal set out in the deed of foundation was amicable contact between alumni and strengthening the awareness of cohesion, support for the current and former students of the institute in self-education and scientific efforts by promoting research or publishing their works and financial support for the family members of association members if necessary. Proposal to the Hungarian Royal Minister of Interior concerning the bylaws of the Former Members’ Association. Budapest, 17 November, 1921. MDKL box 83, file 163/1.
583 The text of the Organisational Rules of the Báró Eötvös József Collegium, published in the Appendix to the 1 September 1923 issue of Hivatalos Közlöny (Official Journal).
584 In addition to the sections listed, the following parts were amended: II. 3. c.), III.5, 6, 7. IV. 88/1921–4 Cur.
Proposal of Pál Teleki to the MRPE Minister. Budapest, July 18, 1921. MDKL box 50, file 95/3.
163
7.5. Relationship Between the Eötvös Collegium and the MRPE as Supervisory Authority 7.5. Relationship Between the Eötvös Collegium and the MRPE as Supervisory Authority
been handled by the Ministry’s Department for Secondary Schools since 1919. As this questioned the recognition of the Collegium’s nature as a college, the ministry was asked to return the administration of the Collegium’s affairs to the realm of Department IV of Universities and Colleges.585 The new rules of organisation and Pál Teleki as curator were proposed to the governor for approval by MRPE Minister Kunó Klebelsberg on 16 April 1923. Having confirmed that the appointment and the change involved no surplus costs, Horthy approved both proposals.586
The easing of tensions between the MRPE and the Collegium was indicated by the fact that the MRPE supported the lectures to be held by Nándor Ember587 promoting Hungar-ian culture in Spain. Similarly to the strengthening of ItalHungar-ian relations, the purpose of this was also to improve Hungary’s diplomatic isolation to some extent. Ember contacted the minister of public education in a letter in July 1923, saying he had been living as a music teacher in Madrid for two years and would be happy to deliver free lectures on Hungarian literature, history and music at the Madrid University in his free time. In order to real-ize these plans, he asked that the Hungarian ministry of foreign affairs ask the Spanish government by way of the Hungarian embassy to appoint him to hold lectures and to make available appropriate premises at the Madrid university as well as to grant the scientific freedom due to university lecturers for this. In addition, he asked the Hungarian counterpart to provide him with the literature required for holding the lectures, and he wished to secure a guarantee that in the event that the Hungarian government were to establish a faculty in Madrid, he would be appointed to head the faculty.588
Though the ministry was initially somewhat reserved about this opportunity offered,589 Géza Bartoniek’s verification diverted matters in the appropriate direction. The director pointed out that Ember was one of the most excellent alumni of the Collegium and, as Ernő Dohnányi’s student at the Music Academy, he had held a number of concert tours abroad and had been living in Madrid for two years and the offer was veritably made with no vested interest.590 As a result, the MRPE addressed a memorandum to the minister for foreign affairs to take the appropriate steps with the Spanish authorities.591 Eventually, the Spanish government granted permission,592 as a result of which Ember turned up in
585 Proposal 12/1923. by Géza Bartoniek to the MRPE Minister concerning the amendment to the Organisational Rules. Budapest, January 23, 1923. MDKL box 50, file 95/3.
586 95.001/1923. sz. IV. MRPE Minister Kunó Klebelsberg notifies curator Pál Teleki about the supreme resolution of Governor Miklós Horthy to approve the Organisational Rules and the identity of the curator . MNL OL K 636. box 161, item 25 (1923).
587 He was a member of the Collegium studying Hungarian and French between 1914 and 1919, in addition to which he earned a qualification as music teacher at the Music Academy. MDKL box 4, file 5, lot 12.
588 Letter of Dr. Nándor Ember to the MRPE Minister. Budapest, July 9, 1923. MNL OL K 636. box 182, item 27 (1924).
589 103.490/923. Opinion of department III/a of the MRPE on the support for Nándor Ember’s lectures in Madrid. Budapest, July 1923. MNL OL K 636. box 182, item 27 (1924).
590 115/1923. Letter from Géza Bartoniek, director of the Eötvös Collegium, to the MRPE Minister concerning the proposal filed by Nándor Ember. Budapest, August 3, 1923. MNL OL K 636. box 182, item 27 (1924).
591 103.490/923. document IV Memorandum of the MRPE Minister to the minister of foreign affairs concerning the appointment of Nándor Ember. Budapest, August 23, 1923. MNL OL K 636. box 182, item 27 (1924).
592 91.718/1924. department IV 24 September Memorandum of the minister of foreign affairs to the MRPE Minister: lectures by dr. Nándor Ember on Hungarian literature at the Madrid university. Budapest, 24
164
7. The History of the Eötvös Collegium Between 1919 and 1927 7. The History of the Eötvös Collegium Between 1919 and 1927
the Hungarian capital to request support for his cause in person. Having convinced the Hungarian authorities about his capability of performing the task, in addition to deliver-ing lectures, the idea was raised that he should prepare Spanish-language publications to promote Hungarian culture in Latin American countries in addition to Spain.593 Therefore, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs relied on the institute indirectly in order to achieve goals of cultural policy and of diplomacy also after 1920.
For a short while, it seemed that Pál Teleki managed to consolidate the crisis period that
For a short while, it seemed that Pál Teleki managed to consolidate the crisis period that