1922 Encyclopædia Britannica/Esthonia
ESTHONIA (Eesti) was declared an independent republic on May 19 1919. The former Russian province of Esthonia (see 9.797) was extended by the Russian law of April 12 1917 over the four northern districts of Livonia, inhabited by Esthonians, namely Pernau (Parnu), Fellin (Viljandi), Dorpat (Tartu, russ. Youriev) and Verro, and the island of Osel or Ezel (Saaremaa). The Russo-Esthonian peace treaty of Feb. 2 1920 added Narva, parts of the Yamburg and Gdov districts of the province of Petrograd and of the district of Pechori (Petserimaa) of the province of Pskov. This new strategic frontier runs from 10 m. E. of the Narova river across the Peipus lake towards Isborsk. The western frontier bordering Latvia includes the town of Valk ceded to Esthonia by arbitration on ethnographical grounds, and runs in the same direction towards the Baltic Sea. Thus Esthonia's political boundaries coincide almost completely with the linguistic extension of the race. The area, 18,300 sq. m., is larger than Switzerland, Denmark or Holland.
The population of the former province of Esthonia was estimated in Jan. 1913 at 492,000; United Esthonia, as the republic is called, has a pop. of 1,500,000 (according to Martna 1,750,000). About 90% of the pop. belong to the Esthonian race, 4% to the Russian and 2.4% to the German Balto-Saxons (called Balts, Germano-Balts, in Esthonia “Saksa,” who formerly numbered 21,800, 4,700 forming the nobility, 300 the clergy). There were in Dec. 1920 about 40,000 resident foreigners, chiefly Russians.
Until 1918 the Balts were economically preponderant both in town and country. To this class belonged most of the owners of the big estates (“Baltic barons”), the commercial magnates and the chief traders and merchants in the larger towns, but great changes have since taken place. During 1897-1900 the average annual rate of increase showed a slow growth of pop., 9.3 per 1,000 in Esthonia and 8.0 in Livonia. About 300,000 Esthonians are colonists in Russia and Siberia, having emigrated chiefly because of the economic dependence of the landless agricultural population. Before the war the birth-rate averaged 28, the death-rate 20 per 1,000. The predominant religion is Protestant, with a small number of Greek Orthodox Christians.
This rural pop. was formerly divided into three main groups of which the first has been suppressed, (a) large landowners with 829 estates, (b) peasant-proprietors, a middle class (nicknamed the “grey barons”) owning 50,961 holdings, and (c) the tenants of small allotments and agricultural labourers forming about three-quarters of the rural pop., whom it was proposed to settle partly on the estates nationalized by the State. The economic consequences of this social dislocation were in 1921 the problem of the day, but the race and class hatred were so strong that these difficulties were disregarded.
The figures for 1919 supplied by the Ministry of Labour showed a decrease of workers engaged in industry; 271 private concerns employed 15,417 workers (printing works and large business concerns are included); the Government employed 21,006 persons (on railways, post and telegraphs, harbour works, timber industry). Of the private industries the more important were: cotton, 3,007 workers; yarn and wool, 2,000; flax, hemp and rope, 1,200; paper, 1,232; metal and shipbuilding, 3,700; cement and bricks, 625; tanneries, refineries and soap, 345; food production in steam mills, starch, etc. 612; chemical (matches, gas), 820. Before the war the cotton mill at Kraenholm near Narva with 600,000 spindles had 12,000 workers, in 1920 only 2,700; of capital invested, 45% was Russian, 30% English and 25% German. Want of fuel and raw material stopped work in flax spinneries, cloth works and leather factories. In 1921 the Russo-British shipyard was trying to sell its floating dock; a new company was initiating the sugar industry and an English firm was promoting the mechanical treatment of flax. Foreign capital was wanted for industry as well as for the revival of agriculture. The coöperative system takes a large share in public educational work (theatres, libraries, museum, literary society). The figures for 1917 were: 99 societies of mutual credit with 42,606 shareholders; 98 coöperative supply stores with 15,052 members; 12 agricultural coöperative societies with 2,018 members; 138 coöperative milk societies. A wholesale coöperative society is preparing for large activities in timber, flax, fish, vegetables and manufactured goods. Before the war Esthonia and northern Livonia were almost self-supporting in regard to foodstuffs. Wheat for the towns and sugar were supplied from Russia, while dairy products, pigs, potatoes (spirits) were exported. It is impossible to estimate separately the losses from war, revolution, military occupation and the suppression of the large estates. The figures available are conflicting. Statistics published by the Ministry of Agriculture showed that the area of arable land and agricultural production in 1920 were approximately the same as in 1916, while critics advanced totally different figures, and professional circles and influential parties like the Maaliit, formerly led by K. Paetz, complained of the ruinous influence of socialistic doctrines on economic policy. As in the other border-states, the large number of government officials and their corrupt methods were subjects of frequent discussion in the daily press. There seemed no doubt that the productive capacity of the country had been at least temporarily reduced.
Natural Resources. — The republic in 1921 owned 1,170,000 ac. of coniferous woods and 650,000 ac. of leafy or mixed woods. Over 90% of this area, forming 79.2% of the large estates, was nationalized with the latter and is managed by the State. Together with the concessions in Russia granted by the Peace Treaty these are expected to rank as assets. Extensive deforesting in the course of the war for fuel and for military purposes made serious inroads upon the forest area. The local need of fuel has rendered exportation on a large scale impossible. Concessions of combustible shale to a British-Belgian company were in prospect in 1921. There is a cement factory at Port Kunda. Near Izborsk are concessions of plaster of Paris and at Suurup of limestone. Peat occurs in the Yupre district. The Narova rapids are expected to develop 600,000 H.P. By Art. 33 of the Land Act of Oct. 10 1919 all natural resources of the soil are property of the republic.
Except Baltic Port, which is to be declared a free port, all Esthonian seaports are icebound for some time of the year. The port of Revel (Tallinn) — depth 23-30 ft., length of quay 10,904 ft., capacity of tonnage 55,000, warehouse area 1,333,005 sq. ft. — is the most important. The total quay length of the Esthonian harbours (Revel, Pernau, Narva, Port Baltic, Hapsal, Arensburg, Kunda, Loksa, Rohukula) is about 30,000 ft., and shipping of a total tonnage of 145,000 can be berthed. Special harbour dues, 4d. per each gross registered ton. For the first half of 1920 the shipping which entered Revel was 709 Esthonian ships, net tonnage 27,886; 29 German, net tonnage 18,653; 107 Finnish, 16,860 tons; 47 Swedish, 10,001 tons; Danish, 6,882 tons; 2 American, 5,055 tons; 1 French, 1,190 tons; British none. Total shipping 948 with 91,524 net tonnage. In 1913 590 steamships entered Revel with a tonnage of 477,154. Of these 192 were German, 149,362 tons; 132 Russian, 91,361 tons; 70 British, 78,138 tons.
Imports and exports for 1920 amounted, according to the Government returns, to 3,912,394 and 7,675,508 tons respectively; the total value for the second half of 1920 in Esthonian marks (based upon the rate of exchange £1 = E.mk. 270) was 703 millions for the imports, 738 millions for the exports and 961 millions for goods in transit. Nevertheless Esthonia suffered from an adverse exchange. In March 1920 £1 = 350 E.mk., in May 1920 = 240, in May 1921 = 1,075. Imported goods were beyond the purchasing power of the population. The prosperity of the Baltic states is based chiefly on internal trade and foreign trade with Russia. For 1920 Esthonia received from Great Britain coal, petroleum, cotton and sugar, 1,142,759 tons, exporting to her 3,531,362 tons of timber, paper, pulp, etc. Germany exported to Esthonia 1,298,670 tons of salt, iron goods, and fertilizers, and received 275,905 tons of potatoes. Imports from other countries were miscellaneous and of minor importance. Esthonia exported in 1920 potatoes, spirits, timber, pulp, paper, flax, bricks and cement, and imported flour, sugar, herrings, salted fish, salt, leather, wool, cotton, iron, agricultural machinery, coal, petrol, fertilizers.
After the German occupation, when the Russian frontier was closed, the factories worked with a minimum production, having no markets; stocks of raw material became short and all factories were cut off from their financial bases because the Revel banks, which were obliged to keep nearly all their deposits in Russia, were practically bankrupt. With the financial help of the German military authorities, the factories worked for Germany and the Ukraine, but most goods were put into stock. The first provisional Government did much to promote industry; later, however, the Central ProfessionalUnion of Workers exercised a deleterious influence.
Origin of the Esthonian Republic. — The declaration of independence of May 19 1919 stated that “no material improvement had been effected by the Russian revolution in 1917,” that later “Esthonia was sacrificed to Germany under the Brest-Litovsk Treaty”; that in Nov. 1918 “the Soviet armies attacked her, bringing in their train more suffering and misery”; and that “in consideration of this the Esthonian nation was under no obligation to respect the union with Russia.” After the fall of Tsardom the Esthonians feared anarchy more than Russification, but after the defeat of Russia it was German preponderance which they chiefly dreaded. They were thus virtually compelled to declare for independence. On April 12 1917 the Russian provisional Government accorded the enlarged Esthonian province a representative body (Diet, “Maapaen” or “Maanoukogu”) and the right to recall all their nationals from the Russian colours with a view to the formation of a national defence force. On July 1 and Nov. 15 1918 the Diet declared its independence and rejected the proffered aid of Germany. With the exception of their Bolshevik section, all Esthonian political parties under the leadership of K. Paetz and others based their policy on the defeat of Germany, although that country's power was still unbroken. The Balto-Saxons, on the contrary, especially the majority of the gentry, released from the allegiance to the throne, which to most of them meant the Russian State, decided to turn to Germany for help. Their disbelief in the creative power of the Esthonian people at that moment was all the more to be excused, seeing that the capital was under the rule of Esthonian Bolsheviks, whose leader, Anwelt, was openly preparing a reign of red terror. The marshal of the nobility, Baron Dellingshausen, on Jan. 28 1918 invited the Germans to occupy Esthonia; they took Revel on Feb. 25. Over a hundred hostages were taken by the retiring Bolsheviks; of these Dellingshausen was to be tried in Petrograd, whilst the majority were transported under ghastly conditions to Siberia; through the intervention of Germany they were, however, repatriated. On Feb. 24 an Esthonian provisional Government was formed (Paetz, Wilms, Poska, Larko, Kukk and others) and an independent republic proclaimed. Germany did not recognize this Government, but established a regime of military occupation under which the Balts were made dominant; this lasted over eight months. The German occupation widened the gulf between class and race and postponed the formation of an Esthonian force hostile to Germany. Still the power of the local Bolsheviks was broken, many lives were saved and thousands of Esthonians effected their escape from Soviet Russia. England, France and Italy, informed of the views of Esthonia, expressed in May their readiness to grant provisional recognition to the Esthonian National Council as a de facto independent body (Prize case of the ss. “Kayak,” Admiralty Court of Appeal, Jan.-Feb. 1919), while the German Emperor was considering the request initiated by the Baltic nobility (April 13) for annexation by Germany. There could hardly have been a greater contrast between the two sections of the Esthonian population. The Nov. Armistice contained a clause compelling the Germans to maintain order and law in the occupied territories of Russia, while neither the Allies nor the local governments which came into being had sufficient forces available to resist the advance of the Russian red forces and the rising of the local pro-Bolsheviks. Even then the Esthonian National Council insisted upon taking over all responsibility; on Nov. 14 the German representative, the Social-Democrat deputy Winnig, resigned in their favour. On Nov. 19 an evacuation agreement was signed, which, however, had not the expected effect of leaving the Esthonians in possession of the military stores, etc. All that was available for the defence of the country were two units, some 600 men strong, under Col. Weiss, of Baltic volunteers (the Baltic regiment), including 18 barons, Stackelberg in the ranks, prepared to assist in combating Bolshevism. At first Gen. Laidoner, later knighted by the King, had at his disposal this intrepid corps, besides 3,000 volunteers from Finland under Gen. Wetzer, enlisted by means of a loan of 20 million mks. guaranteed by the Revel banks. The Esthonian units in process of formation were at that moment keener against the retiring Germans than against the Bolsheviks.
The War against Soviet Russia (Nov. 1919 to Feb. 2 1920). — The Russian red army — nominally Esthonian Communists — invaded Esthonia as the German troops retired. For some weeks three-fourths of Esthonia experienced the full measure of Bolshevik methods. The cruelties and massacres at Dorpat (liberated Jan. 14 1919), Narva, Vesenberg, etc., produced an anti-Bolshevik feeling among the Esthonian soldiery. A Finnish loan and war material from Great Britain helped to arrest the enemy's advance 30 m. from Revel, and the Bolsheviks were driven out of the country in the course of a month. But fresh forces were threatened — Latvia having become Bolshevik — all along the 300 m. of land frontier. With the help of the British navy, which in Dec. prevented the Bolshevik fleet from taking Revel, it again became possible in May to land forces in the rear of the enemy (Luga river) in coöperation with Russian anti-Bolshevik forces, a coöperation which tended to grow less close towards the autumn. The commanding town of Pskov was taken when an unexpected incident threatening a new German danger necessitated military operations in the direction of Riga. This town (see Latvia) had on May 22 been liberated by a daring raid in which a decisive part was played by the Baltic Landeswehr under the command of a German, Major Fletcher, one-third of which consisted of volunteers from Germany. The advance of this force northwards conflicted with the views of the Entente powers. The Esthonians detached troops and armoured trains to this new front. Fighting began near Venden (June 2), an armistice declared on June 11 was broken, and fighting continued near Rup (June 13), followed by a victorious advance towards Riga. According to the terms of the armistice of July 3, drawn up by Gen. Sir H. Gough, while the Baltic section obtained an English commander, Col. A. R. Alexander, the purely German section of the opponents had to evacuate Riga, where the Latvian Government of Ulmanis was reëstablished. Esthonia received the thanks of the Lettish National Assembly for the liberation of northern Latvia, and an agreementfor mutual help the nucleus of a Baltic federation — was signed on July 20. Another incident described as “a German conspiracy against Latvia” diverted the Esthonian forces from the Bolshevik front — the Bermondt affair; an arrangement made by Gen. Marsh in July for a combined advance in Sept., with the help of Bermondt's Russo-German volunteer force, was cancelled at the instance of Latvia, and the Esthonians had again to assist Latvia. Meanwhile, in order to divide their enemies, the Soviet Government offered peace to Esthonia. The North-Western Government retorted by recognizing Esthonia's independence (Aug. 11). A sum of $50,000,000 was advanced by the United States (Aug. 15), Russian vessels were sunk by the English in the Kronstadt harbour, and the Esthonians continued to assist — though half-heartedly — the ineffective offensive against Petrograd in Oct. After Sept. 12, in accordance with a vote of the Constituent Assembly, the Esthonians prepared the ground in Latvia, Lithuania and Finland for peace negotiations with Russia. (The Dorpat Conferences, Sept. 29-Oct. 1, and Nov. 9, further developed the idea of a Baltic federation.) On Nov. 20 Gen. Yudenich handed over the command to Gen. Laidoner, and on Nov. 26 terminated his military operations. The Soviet army was stopped at Narva (Nov. 22) and the Russian white army sought refuge in Esthonia. On Dec. 1 peace pourparlers were resumed. On Dec. 4 hostages were exchanged as provided in the armistice signed at Dorpat (Dec. 3). After extensive negotiations (Krassin, later Joffe, for the Soviet Power, J. Poska for Esthonia) a treaty of peace was signed on Feb. 2 1920, and approved by the London declaration of Feb. 24. The chief stipulations of this treaty provided for the suppression of all armed vessels on the Peipus lake; Russia declared herself prepared to join in any future recognition of the international neutrality of Esthonia; foreign troops were to be demobilized (Russian white army); Russian State property devolved to Esthonia, Russia to pay 15,000,000 gold rubles (about £1,500,000) while Esthonia was not to be held responsible for Russia's debts (this was counter to the French point of view); Russia was to return all property removed from Esthonia; Esthonia to have the preferential right to build a railway from Revel to Moscow; a timber concession for 2,600,000 ac.; a favoured-nation clause and the fixing of a strategic frontier and ethnographic boundaries in the Pechora district were included. Russia obtained the concession that transit freights should in no case exceed the local charges and that no import and transit duties should be levied by Esthonia; further she obtained preferential rights' to the electric power from the Narova waterfalls. Russia, anxious to extend her outlet towards the West, offered similar advantages to Latvia, Lithuania, Finland, the Ukraine, Georgia and Poland, thus creating a new situation in Eastern Europe. Esthonia was the first to become the continental market of exchange for the trade between Western Europe and Russia (under Gukovsky, chief of the Soviet trade delegation at Revel, which became a centre of speculation).
Esthonian policy before and after the peace was in close touch with Great Britain (missions of Gen. Gough, Gen. Talent, Col. Percy Gordon) and the United States (Col. Green, Prof. Morrison). Esthonia received from these countries respectively military, financial and medical aid (e.g. against typhoid imported by Russian refugees), as well as moral support in consolidating her independence and in coping with the preponderance of the gentry, the pro-German or pro-Russian reactionary barons. The problem involved in the land question deserves special attention, being typical of the changes initiated in all the border states (Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Rumanian Bessarabia and Georgia), which adopted the system of appropriation by the State of all large agricultural estates without adequate compensation, the management of forests by the State, and the sub-division of arable land into small holdings (decrees of Dec. 17 and Feb. 28 1918, the Land Act of Oct. 10 1919). A Constituent Assembly was convened after the liberation of the territory on April 28.
Democrats or Peasant party, a bourgeois party — leader Paetz; (b) Labour party, socialists — leader Strandmann, later prime minister, promoter of the agrarian reform; (c) Moderate Social Democrats and Social Revolutionaries. A provisional constitutional charter was framed on June 6 1919 and definitely adopted in an amended form on June 15 1920 (translated into English, Baltic Review, L., vol. i., Nos. 2 and 3). The power of the State was declared to be “in the hands of the people”; Esthonian was to be the official language. Every Esthonian citizen was given the right to determine his own nationality, the members of minority nationalities being entitled to form corresponding autonomous institutions; where the majority of the inhabitants were not Esthonians the local language was recognized as the official language (this applied chiefly to Swedish, Russian and German). The people exercise their political rights (a) by plebiscite, (b) by their initiative in legislation, and (c) by election to the State Assembly (Riigikogu). No law passed by this Assembly can come into force if opposed by one-third of the legal number of members pending a plebiscite. The State Assembly is composed of 100 members elected for three years by universal suffrage. The governor, i.e. the head of the State (Riigiwanem or State Elder), acts as prime minister. The other ministers are elected by the Assembly. They must resign on failure to obtain a vote of confidence. The State Court of Justice is elected in thesame way, and selects the local judges for life.
The Church is separated from the State, all glebe land and incomes based upon former public law being abolished without compensation by the Land Act. The Minister for Foreign Affairs, J. Poska (d. 1920), supported by the Constituent Assembly, negotiated the peace with Soviet Russia and prepared the de jure recognition of Esthonia. The decision of the Supreme Council at Paris on this matter (Jan. 21 1921) was not adopted by the United States. Admission to the League of Nations was refused on Dec. 17 1920 owing to the attitude of the French and British delegates.
State Assembly began its functions on Jan. 4 1921. Labour (22 seats) and Social Democrats including Communists (34) formed the majority; the remainder (44 seats) belonged to the Peasants' party, Christian, popular party and national minorities. The Cabinet was a Coalition; premier, K. Paetz. Its programme reflected the problems and tendencies of the day: (1) Estates to be divided into small holdings; (2) enforcement of Land Act to harmonize with the food problem; (3) estates managed by State officials to be either let or divided; (4) suitable buildings on estates to be arranged for industry; (5) consolidation of internal peace; (6) de-control; (7) organization of minorities; (8) religion to be taught in the schools if so desired; (9) emigrés to be repatriated; (10) compensation fornationalized land to be reëxamined.
At the municipal elections the Social Democrats lost a number of seats, but on the other hand Communistic plots were sporadically referred to in the press.
Act of Oct. 1919, according to official figures for United Esthonia,with the exclusion of the Pechori district, was as follows: —
|(A) Large Estates||Total
|(a) belonging to individual owners|
|734||manorial estates (knights' estates)||3,791,718||5.165|
|95||entailed estates (110)||998,133||10.507|
|(b) belonging to corporations|
|8||to the nobility corporations||109,712||13.714|
|101||to the Russian State||851,945||8.534|
|19||to the Peasant Land Bank||168,575||8.872|
|108||Church estates (glebe land)||133,796||1.239|
|18||to townships (corporations)||102,376||5.688|
|(B) Small Holdings|
|23,023||leased farms on large estates||1,375,329||59.73|
|50,961||farms owned by the occupiers||4,349,614||84.76|
agricultural land. Hardly 1% of the small holdings is under forest, while 4,927,763 ac. are agricultural land.
This division of property, large and small farming being conducted in independent self-contained units, proved economically progressive. (Only some 12,000 leasehold farms in North Esthonia were too small.) But social and political conditions as well as racial antagonism produced a change tantamount to a social revolution, accomplished by a coalition of the petty bourgeoisie and the proletariat with a speed attributed to the danger of a spontaneous Bolshevik move. The beginning was made by the decree of Dec. 17 1918 empowering the State to take possession of “badly managed” estates. This was not a corn production act, nor a means of enforcing proper cultivation; no notice was served, no directions given to the landlord, no default established, no arbitration admitted, no compensations. The economic result was negative (as shown by the Agricultural Conference Nov. 1918), but the measure satisfied some aspirations, seeing that in the course of a year some 300 landlords were dispossessed. On Feb. 28 1919 another decree promised the division of the large estates among the soldiers and the landless agricultural workers, and on Oct. 10 of the same year an agrarian reform was passed by the Constituent Assembly. It was based on the assumptions that the rights of the landlord were non-existent in the cases (a) of entails, (b) of glebe land, (c) of estates seized by Sweden after 1680 and restored to their owners by Russia according to Art. XI. of the Nystad Treaty of 1731 (this applied to 5⁄6 of the manorial estates) and (d) with regard to former waste land (peasant land) reunited to the demesne according to the Statutes of 1849 and 1856 (about 1⁄6 of this category of land). No compensation was therefore to be granted in these cases. The fact that during the German occupation the landlords were prepared to cede 1⁄3 of their land for German colonization, and the desire to prevent confiscationwithout order and programme as in Russia, were also of moment.
be redivided on the following lines: (a) Leased farms remained the property of the occupier; (b) forests were to be managed by the State (Art. XXVI.); (c) the manorial houses, gardens and parks became the property of the State (Art. XXVII.); (d) glebe land must either be let to church parishes or distributed to neighbouring boroughs; (e) arable land was to be allotted in small holdings to soldiers, their relatives and landless workers, with hereditary tenure. The former owners were to move from their homes, only foreigners to remain in occupation of their lands and homes, until a definite compensation Act could be passed and the indemnity paid. The principles on which compensation was to be calculated were laid down in the Act (Art. XII.-XIV.) and, unless alterations should be introduced, would lead to the following consequences.
The valuation of the land for the former land tax was to be the limit of the indemnity. Therefore (a) many mortgagees, banks as well as private persons, would lose their security, although since 1864 all such charges had been duly registered. In Northern Esthonia mortgages of 34,352,400 rubles would be deprived of security to the mortgagees. (b) The value of the buildings alone was insured against fire in 449 estates for a sum of 42,544,264 rubles, while the proposed amount of compensation for 468 estates amounted to 11,981,450 rubles. (c) In numerous estates the value of drainages effected for the last 25 years is higher than the promised compensation for the land. (d) The rate of indemnity for live stock and implements was from 15 to 150 times lower than their market value. Even Esthonian politicians (Toennison) appeared doubtful whether the ruin of the landlords would prove ultimately of economic benefit to the country, and amendments were being discussed in order to restore confidence and improve the money market. The Ministry of Agriculture reports concluded: “In spite of all difficulties 20,000 farms were established by spring 1920. The lack of inventory is one great obstacle. Many of the agricultural workmen due to this have not succeeded in becoming tenants and therefore oppose the dis- tribution of land. A certain percentage of the new landholders will fall out of the ranks; but the production problem is not considered to be insolvable.” An Esthonian critic (A. Busch) in a monograph insisted that live stock and implements were deteriorating and that not a single building had been erected since the law was passed. The transformation of large holdings into small holdings required a new investment of capital, which was totally lacking.
Bibliography. — Apart from the official publications of the Esthonian Government quoted at length in the non-official periodicals published in Paris and London, sources of information were scanty in 1921. The proceedings of the Paris Peace Conference were not yet accessible. The literature on the subject is either panegyric, propagandistic or detractory. Mémoire sur l'Esthonie présentée par la Délégation esthonienne à la Conference de la Paix, 1919; Martna, Memorie della Delegazione estone (Rome, 1919); in German, Die Esten und die Estnische Frage; in French, L'Esthonie et les Esthoniens (Paris, 1919); Revue Baltique (Paris, Sept. 1918. in progress); Esthonian Review (London, July 1919-June 1920); Baltic Review (London, Aug. 1920, in progress); Oskar Bernmann, Die Agrarfrage in Estland (1920); Courland, Livonia and Esthonia (handbooks prepared under the direction of the Historical Section of the Foreign Office, 50, London, 1920); Gaston Gaillard, L'Allemagne et le Baltikum (1919); Baron Alfons Heyking, The Baltic Problem (1919); Russian Liberation Committee, The Baltic Provinces (anonym. by Baron Korff, 1919); Alexis Engelhardt, Die deutschen Ostseeprovinzen Russlands (3rd ed., 1916). All such publications represent various points ofview.