Area D

Legal, economic and administrative structures

Panel D1: A republic of lawyers? The legal professional world

How did legal professions change after the establishment of Czechoslovakia? We will discuss whether there were distinct regroupments among individual types of legal professions, how attractive working for the new state offices was, and what were the consequences of rise of number of law graduates. How did professional chambers, associations and unions act? What were the requirements and attempts to reform individual professions (e.g., the judiciary) of that time? Other areas which should not be ignored are the social capital of lawyers and the extent to which it was utilized in public, especially in political and organizational activities, and reoccurring career paths (the “inheritability” of legal professions). We will also focus on disciplinary decisions in relation to certain legal professions and the accessibility of legal services including legal aid for the poor. Central European comparisons and contributions from the areas of legal, social, political and economic history will be appreciated.

Jozef Vozár – Stanislav Balík – Martina Gajdošová (chair)

Panel D2: Local power at the beginning of the republic between continuation and change

To what extent did the notional reins of power remain in the municipalities, districts and countries of the existing power groups and to what extent were there changes? How did the situation progress inland and what was it like in the German-speaking districts? We would like to explore the way in which local power structures in Slovakia and Carpathian Ruthenia progressed, as well as the effect and impact of founding national committees and the ways in which central state measures towards local governments manifested themselves in the hands of national groups. Research into these and related questions can help us understand the way, and extent to which, the year 1918 did or did not change life in municipalities, districts and countries.

Martin Rája (chair)

Panel D3: Unification of the law – early years

One of the important problems of the successor states was unification of the law. The unification processes emerged from the very beginning, firstly ad hoc, and then later, more systematic ones. Unification also made it possible to update some of the old, often obsolete, regulations, to reach solutions differing from the existing solutions in both areas to be harmonized. Considerable inequalities in the negotiating positions of the territories which were supposed to be unified made the process very complicated. However, it was often the case that one territory was forced to adopt the existing legal solution of the other territory, and the solution selected was more obsolete. We are interested in unification in all areas of law, especially in those which tended to be neglected. Attention should also be given to arguments for the selection of possible solutions and the methods of communicating changes to the general public. This section will be limited to the early years of unification (1918-25). Contributions from the areas of legal, social, political and economic history would be appreciated.

Jozef Beňa – Tomáš Gábriš – Ondřej Horák (chair)

Panel D4: Economic self-reliance and economic nationalism

The formation of an independent Czechoslovak state provided new opportunities for opposition against foreign capital of the formal Central powers, especially from Vienna and Budapest, which was vastly present, such capital could now be subject to domestic taxation, as well as against the competition of cheap foreign products, food and raw materials. Nostrification measures forced foreign companies to relocate their economic management and registered offices to the republic or to found subsidiaries there. Requirements of residence in Czechoslovakia and other standards and recommendations changed the situation in the bodies of business organizations. Nostrification resulted in considerable transfers of capital and a significant rise of the home capital, especially of the capital owned by Czechs (increases of capital, repatriation of shares). In relation to the orientation of foreign trade, there was a rather complicated conflict between proponents of protectionism and those supporting free trade in the early days of the republic. Contributions can also include Central European comparisons; they can possibly explore – in a more general way – economic self-reliance and dependence and legal-political measures enabling shifts on the scale of (in)depen-dence.

Eduard Kubů (chair)

Panel D5: How were Czechoslovak offices formed and where did their clerks come from?

The new republic formed its central administrative structures and adopted the structures of lower administrative levels and local authorities. This section will focus on institutional and personnel continuity and discontinuity, and in the case of the central structures, it will also take the central offices of Cisleithania and Transleithania into consideration. We are interested in the career paths, education and origin of Czechoslovak clerks and the significance of the local authorities as a personnel pool for the young republic’s state administration. Although the new state stepped into the monarchy’s old shoes and to a considerable extent, it also adopted its administrative structure as well as laws related to the status of clerks, the plans for administrative reforms and unified division of the state administrative space became a popular topic in the long run. On the other hand, promises of democratization, “de-Austrification” and decentralization were a rather short-term phenomenon, yet a quite interesting one in the early days of the republic.

Pavel Mates – Jiří Šouša ml. (chair)

Panel D6: Economic power, its structure, interests and dynamics

This interdisciplinary topic will focus on the way economic elites acted in the context of the economic, legal, cultural and especially social development in Czechoslovakia. Using contemporary representations of symbolic capital, social connections, interactions and changes in legal regulations, we will follow the interests and stands of the economic elites and their relation to emerging national and international economic connections and to the changing state economic policy. A key question is in what way the business lobby had both direct and indirect effects on the young state’s developing legislation. Contributions from the areas of social, economic and legal history as well as social geography and anthropology would be appreciated.

Martin Marek – Petra Skřejpková (chair)