State | Population | % Population | Seats Lower | Seats Upper | Electoral Votes | |||
Galicia | 1663250 | 14.78% | 60 | 15.11% | 4 | 8.33% | 64 | 14.38% |
Romania | 1514100 | 13.45% | 55 | 13.85% | 4 | 8.33% | 59 | 13.26% |
Cisalpina | 1404630 | 12.48% | 51 | 12.85% | 4 | 8.33% | 55 | 12.36% |
Bohemia | 1309850 | 11.64% | 47 | 11.84% | 4 | 8.33% | 51 | 11.46% |
Hungary | 1088300 | 9.67% | 40 | 10.08% | 4 | 8.33% | 44 | 9.89% |
Austria | 1020690 | 9.07% | 37 | 9.32% | 4 | 8.33% | 41 | 9.21% |
Croatia | 1008200 | 8.96% | 37 | 9.32% | 4 | 8.33% | 41 | 9.21% |
Silesia | 630000 | 5.6% | 23 | 5.79% | 4 | 8.33% | 27 | 6.07% |
Slovakia | 548900 | 4.88% | 20 | 5.04% | 4 | 8.33% | 24 | 5.39% |
Albania | 371670 | 3.3% | 14 | 3.53% | 4 | 8.33% | 18 | 4.04% |
Tunisia | 333410 | 2.96% | 0 | 0% | 0 | 0% | 0 | 0% |
Carnolia | 254720 | 2.26% | 10 | 2.52% | 4 | 8.33% | 14 | 3.15% |
Crete | 44210 | 0.39% | 3 | 0.76% | 4 | 8.33% | 7 | 1.57% |
Trieste | 42400 | 0.38% | 3 | 0.76% | 4 | 8.33% | 7 | 1.57% |
Suez | 22070 | 0.2% | 0 | 0% | 0 | 0% | 0 | 0% |
11191930 | 397 | 48 | 445 |
((Spain recognises Egyptian sovereignty, pays Sardinia rep, and gives us Melilla; which will then be made into a mini-Tunisia.))((What does Small Seizure entail? I can't remember off the top of my head.))
Perhaps, Councillor; because they are located in the middle of nowhere, bring no benefits unless we plan on colonising vast swathes of West Africa, and can be easily cut off from this Federation through an effective blockade of the Straits of Gibraltar? Not to mention that, unlike Melilla which contains a large and potentially friendly native population, the Canaries are filled with Spaniards who would loathe and despise us?AMC: Aye
SS: Abstain
[Trieste]
If we can receive the Canaries, I do not see why we should not ask for them.
((Guilu's sig))((Where can I find these two war aims proposals?))
((Spain recognises Egyptian sovereignty, pays Sardinia rep, and gives us Melilla; which will then be made into a mini-Tunisia.))
Ministry of Justice's Reply to General Revenjo's Reply to the Statment issued by the Ministry of Justice Regarding the Case and Defence of General RevenjoI shall properly address these presumptions.
First of all, regarding negotiations. I resume my statement, that while the President had announced he desired negotiations, there was never a offical declaration on whether they had commenced, nor did I receive orders at the outbreak of the rebellion.
Second of all, regarding the operation, such a plan would be commanded on behalf of the General Staff, as during all major operations, and while the President presided over it, he never invalidated the operation nor called it off. I also mark that the prosecution is basing concerns off assumptions, as quoted by the Minister of Justice.
Next, the prosecution accuses me of violating the orders of the President, which again, were never received nor ordered.
Lastly, I have stated this constantly, that no full assault would have commenced on the city of Vienna. While such reason regarding attacking enemy occupied cities is absurd and warfare is obviously not correlated to murder, I reaffirm that my intention was not to assault the city, rather to wait upon the reinforcements of the operational armies and arm-guard off the Danubian Revolutionary Guard. I reference that the attack on Vienna would not be insubordination by your own reason, as military actions do not need to be affirmed by the political branches. Nonetheless, I thank the Ministry of Justice for voicing such concerns.
Ministry of Justice's Reply to General Revenjo's Reply to the Statment issued by the Ministry of Justice Regarding the Case and Defence of General Revenjo
While the President never stated that negotations were under way, for security reasons, members of the military should not activly try to sabatoge peace negoitations, which you did by attacking Vienna. You should have been mindfull of the consiquences of your actions. Also, as you handed over control of the operation to the President, he became your direct supperior if you were under the chain of command dealing with the DRB. You were also not under that chain of command as you gave total control over to the President. Isn't against millitary rules to act in the jurisdiction of another command if not given orders to by a higher authority?
You also state that this case lacks legitimacy as it makes assumptions. When I wrote the recently released statement, I was giving you the benifit of the doubt and assuming you were loyal to the Federation. Their is no evidence of this, exept your word. It can easly be assumed that you changed sides when you realized your cause was lost. As such, the jury has to base its verduct on your actions, which brings us to Vienna. Is it not millitary protacal to not attack anything with out orders? You are alowed to use initative, but if the initative failes, you are responible for the consiquences. Am I correct? As such, you were not ordered to attack Vienna by the President, making you responsible for the consiquences. Also, you state that a full assualt on Vienna was not launched. I agree with that. Dispite a full assult not being launched, you still fired on our capital full of our citizens. What if your cannon fire missed its target and hit a house instead? What if some of your men mistaked this fireing as a singal to attack? You would be responsible for the loss of civilian life, and by giving an order, no doubt well though out, that makes the order premeditated, which makes the deaths murder. You say that murder should not be equated with millitary operations, but you were acting out of the chain of command, removing any formal millitary involvment.
Signed,
Aetios Spiros,
Minister of Justice