tions in Helsinki and St. Petersburg concerning Finland's future status. Both sides were agreed that the re-establishment of Finland's rights could be achieved by following the tradition of making a proclamation. In fact, the Russians did proclaim in March that all illegal actions taken in Finland were therewith repealed, and this manifesto was accepted on the whole as an indication of the new Russian government's favorable attitude and was considered an appropriate point of departure for the trend in Finnish policy, since it restored Finland its official right to speak. Once the Provisional Government had approved the coalition Senate formed by Oskari Tokoi, based on the proportionate parliamentary party strengths, and once permission was granted for Parliament to come into session in early April, Finland's government had returned to its normal channels. In Tokoi's Senate, Väinö Tanner, M. Paasivuori, V. Voionmaa, J. Ailio, W. Wuolijoki, as well as Tokoi himself, were members of the Social Democratic party, while E. N. Setälä, Rudolf Holsti, A. Serlachius, A. Tulenheimo, Leo Ehrenrooth and K. Kallio represented the bourgeois parties.

The March Revolution brought a sudden change into Finnish political life, and the immediate future offered broadened perspectives for political developments. The question of the proper procedure under the circumstances was discussed from all angles when Parliament sat, and the all-important question arose of how the powers which had belonged to the Grand Duke were to be held in the future.

Feelings on this problem crossed old party lines. According to some, the Russian Provisional Government was completely in the right in exercising the rights inherited from the Grand Duke, and the Finns had no alternative but to comply. During the spring and summer of 1917, the majority of bourgeois elements supported this view. Others, however, believed that the powers in question had belonged only to the overthrown Grand Duke and did not belong to the Provisional Government. This line of thought fostered the demand for self-inspired action and set off the movement for independence.

Within the Social Democratic party there were no such disagreements on policy as the bourgeois elements exhibited. The results of a late April 1917 meeting of the party's parliamentary steering committee showed that the Socialists considered that very moment the opportune one for the realization of Finland's independence When the Russian Provisional Government in June authorized consideration of this problem of the highest authority by the Finnish Parliament, the Socialists followed their own course

31