and that a large portion of the nation began to regard the King as an enemy. If the party monopoly that had existed up to date was to continue, one had to reckon with revolutionary feeling.
I wanted to minimize the power of the Government, to secure the freedom of the elections, and to decentralize the administration. I thought that the uncertainty of the future was sufficient reason for this alone.
This point of view of mine brought me into opposition with Stefan Tisza, who sought to fight the danger which he also had recognized by an even more strict régime and by a more decided predominance of his party. With regard to the military question, he adopted the point of view of the King completely, not because he shared the attitude of the ruler, but because he was of opinion that the King was acting in accordance with his rights if he exercised his authority in the question of the army, according to his point of view, and because the harmony between the King and the nation seemed to him to be more important than the reform of the army. By the introduction of a common administration of the State and by a powerful disciplined party, as well as a rigid adherence to the order of the day in Parliament, he thought he could manage the Opposition, which was a factious one in his opinion.
In the days of our youth we were friends, and our political careers began in the same camp. I was the one who departed from our common political tendency, and he was the more logical of the two. Nevertheless,
