Discussion Papers 1988.
Spatial Organization and Regional Development
36
ZoltAn HAJDU
REFORMS OF ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION IN
HUNGARY 1950-1984
1. Introduction
The history of the development of the
Hungarian state confirms that the administrative
division of territory was always raised as mainly
a supreme governamental and political question
The meaning,
aim, and way of functioning of
the territorial system were formed in subordina-
tion to the given relations of power and political
aspirations.
The administrative division of Hungarian
territory also bears national peculiarities, for-
med during history. The county -system, which was
establisted nearly simultaneously with the Hungarian
state, maintained significant stability throughout
the course of historical development, obtaining
relative independence and, later, participating
to a significant extent in the shaping of new forms
and solutions.
The natural, economic, and transport struc-
ture, along with the network of settlements of the
state territory, the number of population, the
composition of nationalities, the development of
forces of production, and the established order
of social and territorial division of labour exer-
cised an influence on the formation of the admin-
istrative structures of territory in periodically
changing ways. /E.g.,in earliet stages, physical
Hajdú, Zoltán: Reforms of administrative division in Hungary 1950–1984. Ed:. Orosz Éva, Pécs:
Centre for Regional Studies. Discussion Papers 1988. Spatial Organization and Regional Development 36-53. p.
37
geographical objects /i.e.,rivers, mountains/ were
priorities in the formulation of public administra-
tion boundaries because they can fix public admin-
istration boundaries most definitevely./
The territorial division of the country is
not only an administrative question, since the
division of territory governs the frameworks of
activity of political, jurisdictional, etc, organs,
too, functioning by reason of the territorial prin-
ciple.
The spatiality of the administrative organi-
zation of territory and the questions of division of
functions are raised on two levels from a geographi-
cal point of view:
1/ settlement administration
/village, town/;
2/ territorial administration
/district,towns-
surrounding
/admimistrative hinterland/, county/,
The indispensable condition of efficient and success-
ful functioning of administration is the determina-
tion and regulation of links among diverse levels.
Every attempt at administrative reform or reform of
administration must respond to the concerns at every
level of the territorial division.
2. Main lines of historical development of ter-
ritorial division of administration
The county-system, having formed during his-
tory, is the most important unit in the territorial
organization of Hungarian administration and,simul-
taneously, one of the national peculiarities. All
sub-national administrative functions are based on
county divisions.
The emergence of counties can be traced back
to the XIth century. In the beginning, the county
Hajdú, Zoltán: Reforms of administrative division in Hungary 1950–1984. Ed:. Orosz Éva, Pécs:
Centre for Regional Studies. Discussion Papers 1988. Spatial Organization and Regional Development 36-53. p.
3 8
was a territorial unit for the administration and
management of royal estates, later, in the XIIIth
century, becoming the organization of autonomy of
the nobility. In spite of changes to smaller units,
the county-system preserved its historical territo-
rial roots; essential changes take place only under
outside influence. For example, such influence was
the 150 year Turkish occupation, which was suffi-
ciently long to have an impact on the structures
of the central areas of the country.
In the course of our recent history, signifi-
cant changes in the administrative system of the
country occurred in the years 1870, 1923, 1949, and
after 1984. The changes have been caused on the one
hand by the transformation of social, economic, and
political relations; on the other hand by modifica-
tions of state boundaries and the structure of the
state.
The Austro-Hungarian compromise of 1867 cre-
ated the general political conditions and the gov-
ernamental framework for the evolution of capitalism
in Hungary. The relations of political law of his-
torical Hungary took place in Hungary, having a rel-
ative inner independence within the Autstro-Hungarian
Monarchy. Transylvania was united with what is cal-
led "Motherland"; Croatia-Slavonia arrived at legal
relations of "co-dominion" of it. Town Fiume
/Rijeka/ and its surroundings were annexed to the
country as a "Separate Body".
After the relations of political law were
solved, development of the modern civil administra-
tion began. Reform of the administrative division
of the territory was also undertaken within this
framework, covering both settlements and territor7.
Hajdú, Zoltán: Reforms of administrative division in Hungary 1950–1984. Ed:. Orosz Éva, Pécs:
Centre for Regional Studies. Discussion Papers 1988. Spatial Organization and Regional Development 36-53. p.
39
The legal status of towns, formerly having feudal
privileges, was arranged. Some of the royal free
towns were transformed into municipa boroughs
and given status corresponding to counties.
The legal status and administrative order
of villages vas ad,justed !_n 1871. The law on vil-
lages regulari7ed the administration of the set-
tlements in a uniform framework and created three
categories for villages, which remaired valid until
1549 with small modifications. The districts within
the county united villages into an administrative
framework, but they were not terrltorial self-
goverring units.
The territorial reform of 1876 eliminated
territorial self-governments of feudal origin and
character, with privileged territories being inte-
grated into the county-system. When looking at the
details of the reform, we can underline that the
territorial order of the counties was not entirely
transformed at the formation of the civil adminis-
tration; the civil administration was functioning
mainly among the historical boundaries of counties
After the First World War, the Autstro-Hun-
garian Monarchy fell to pieces; historicel Hungary
disintegrated. Out of its previous 325 411 ke, the
Trianon peace treaty left Hungary with only
93 073 ke, The number of population also fell to
7 6o6 971 as compared to 20 886 487 in 1910. After
the Peace Treaty of Trianon of 1920, the modifica-
tions of the boundaries of counties aggravated the
disproportions and contradictions of the territorial
divisions of their administrations. The territories
of only 10 of its former 72 counties remained intact,
Hajdú, Zoltán: Reforms of administrative division in Hungary 1950–1984. Ed:. Orosz Éva, Pécs:
Centre for Regional Studies. Discussion Papers 1988. Spatial Organization and Regional Development 36-53. p.
4o
while parts of 25 others were removed; the rest
were left outside the new boundares.
In this new situation, the reform of
sion of counties became indispensable. For example,
the smallest county consisted only of two villages
and its area was 16 square kilometres; while the
area of the largest one uas 11.817 square kilome-
tres. The measure and direction of the reform were
fundamentally determined by political intentions.
Thus, in 1923, the broken counties along the border
of the country were urited, thereby decreasing the
number of counties to 25. The reform left untouched
the inner territories of the country.
3. Reforms of administrative division after the
liberation
After the domocratic transformation, started
in 1945 and later after the socialist volte-face,
the problems of the organization of territorial ad-
ministration were raised again. The constitution
of 1949 fixed the socialist economic, social, and
political relations and determined the fundamental
questions of the new administrative division of
territory within the country.
As for the system of territorial units of
the administration, no essential changes took place;
the structure, having formed during the course of
history, continued to exist, notwithstanding the
new administrative tasks for the counties, dis-
tricts, and towns. The most essential modifica-
tion was the successive transformation of the pre-
vious executing controlling administration into a
planning, developing, supplying one, preserving
its standard functions, too.
Hajdú, Zoltán: Reforms of administrative division in Hungary 1950–1984. Ed:. Orosz Éva, Pécs:
Centre for Regional Studies. Discussion Papers 1988. Spatial Organization and Regional Development 36-53. p.
First of all the territories of the
.1
counties have been arranged. Instead of the pre-
vious 25, 19 counties were formed. From political
considerations, an effort was made to stabilize
the territories, so the reform brought only correc-
tions; but through the elimination of broken coun-
ties and the division into two parts of county Pest,
a majority of the territorial and population imbal-
ances were removed /Figure 1/.
When transforming
the territorial order, the natural potentials, the
relations of economic, transport, and the network
of settlements, plus the goals of long-range devel-
opment, were considered equally. The division of
counties in our country up to now has preserved the
terriiorial order, formed at that time, with only a
few villages and one district being reannexed.
The new division of district was formed after
the territorial araanrement of counties. In compar-
ison with the former division, a significant change
occurred when districts received independent council
organization. The number of districts decreased from
150 to 140. Districts were formed on the basis of
transport sheds and zones of attraction to act as
economically and geographically uniform entities.
The administration of settlemEnts was laid
upon new foundtations,too. In this respect, the
territorial rearrangement of administration of
Budapest is of outstanding importance; 7 suburbs and
16 villages were annexed to Budapest.
The town administration was.developed in a
contradictory manner. Three town-categories were
created: 1/ tour, subordinate to the Council of
Ministers /Budapest/; 2/ town, subordinate to the
Hajdú, Zoltán: Reforms of administrative division in Hungary 1950–1984. Ed:. Orosz Éva, Pécs:
Centre for Regional Studies. Discussion Papers 1988. Spatial Organization and Regional Development 36-53. p.
42
f4
•
BORSOD -A BAUJ -
ZEMPLEN
..; -
SZABOLES,-
IA
°
SZ AT MA R
NoGRADS.•
gyinzgyhuzp.. „N./
N
• )..../.-c•rok.
KOMAROM
Debrecen -
"),Gy6R-soi5RoN
-Talabdr
Budapest
0
J DU - °..*
0
—,._._
PEST
•
eS
(z
)) muuthely
aherv
VAS
0
F EJ
0
cskemd
°
B KES
Zataegersz
0 ""-
BACS
BikiSc
ZA LA
TOLNA
K I S KUN
SOMO
'SONORA 8
0
HocirriezdyasOr't
Vaposvdr
:**
°P¢cs
BARANYA
--to—to—t-b- Country borders
Boundaries of counties in 1949
Boundaries of counties in 1950
FIGURE 1 Territorial reform of 1950 in Hungary
Hajdú, Zoltán: Reforms of administrative division in Hungary 1950–1984. Ed:. Orosz Éva, Pécs:
Centre for Regional Studies. Discussion Papers 1988. Spatial Organization and Regional Development 36-53. p.
4 3
county council /24/; 3/ tour, subordinate to the
district council /29/. The design of town admin-
istration failed in its effect /districts did not
possess urban managemert expErierce; it was vithin
a short time that the relationships between towrs
and districts led to sharp contradictions/. Thus as
early as 1954 the situation of town changed. The
towns were removed from the jurisdiction of dis-
trict courcils and towns of district rank were
created; namely, Debrecen, Miskolc, Pecs, and Sze-
ged.
Village_administration is one of the funda-
mental questions in the uxernamental division of
territory. In the case of villages, we can talk
about the vigorous transformation of the territorial
order. Before the introduction of the council system,
3169 villages were coordinated by 1190 large villages
and 662 offices of district-notaries. In 1950, 2.978
village councils were formed, among wbich 2.808 were
independent village councils and from 371 villages
were formed 170 common village ones. The network of
village councils, developed nearly all over the
country, furthered the direct realization of the
aims and activity of the central power in trans-
forming society as local organs of governamental
authority.
Beginning in the 1950's, territoral adminis-
trative reform was carried out in connection with
forming economic regions. Several conceptions were
born in order to establish a regional administra-
tion, i.e., a territorial level, replacing the coun-
ties or one situated over the counties; but the
"official" planning economic regions, established
in 1971, have not received administrative struc-
tures. These 6 planning economic regions covered
Hajdú, Zoltán: Reforms of administrative division in Hungary 1950–1984. Ed:. Orosz Éva, Pécs:
Centre for Regional Studies. Discussion Papers 1988. Spatial Organization and Regional Development 36-53. p.
44
whole counties and served as a means of planning.
By the middle 1980's, even their formal existence
ceased to continue, and in the new economic situa-
tion the place and role of the counties again
strengthened.
Wher costing a glance at the process of
changes of administrative division of the Hungarian
territory between 1950 and 1980 /Table
1/, we can
see that the number of counties remained unchanged,
the number and importance of the districts de-
creased vigorously, and, by 1980, the system of
town-surroundings already took shapE replacing the
districts. The number of towns was growing dynami-
cally, while the number of villages diminished as
a consequence of declaraing them townsonthe me hand,
and through the urificetior of villages on the other
hand. The number of independent councils lessened
dramatically ard that of villages with common coun-
cils sky-rocketed, so that the number of administra-
tive urits of villages deviated from the number of
villages.
All in all, we can say that the establishment
of towns ard urbanization transformed the territo-
rial order of Hungarian administration to a signif-
icant extent in the last three decades. In spite
of this, it cannot be said that the administrative
orgarizational order and the territorial division
were completely established, being adequate to pro-
cesses of urbanization.
4. GeograEncal ayestions of the administrative
reform of 1984
On the 1st of January, 1984, essential changes
took place in the administrative division of the
Hajdú, Zoltán: Reforms of administrative division in Hungary 1950–1984. Ed:. Orosz Éva, Pécs:
Centre for Regional Studies. Discussion Papers 1988. Spatial Organization and Regional Development 36-53. p.
45
territory of the country. The districts were put
foam end, their places being taken over by the
town-surroundings and surroundings of large vil-
lages, respectively. The spheres of activity of
thE elim!_nated district offices were decentralized
to the villages in the majority of cases, a small
number of them becoming towns. As a matter of fact,
this reform was the first step towards the forma-
tion of e two-level administration.
The administration by town-surroundinf is a
transitional form that remains in effect until the
oreation of conditions of village administrations
dliectly by the counties. In ihe course cf the ter-
_
reform, 139 tour-surroundings or surround-
ings of large villages were formEd. Among the seats,
105 are towns and 34 are large villages of towr rank,
recently established. Apart from 4. exceptions /Buda-
pest, Hajdutoszorm4ny, Szazhalombatta, TUrkeve/, the
towns take part in solving the new administrative
tasks. In 34 large villages of towr rank, the condi-
tions of becoming towns have gradually been produced.
When determining the territories of town-
surroundings, two factors come to the front:
1/ circumstances of zones of attraction having form-
ed in consequence of economic- natural potentiali-
ties and those of the geography of settlements of
the given village; 2/ point of views of administra-
tive policy of the middle level administration.
In the structure of the new territorial ad-
ministration, the medium extension units are given
a decisive role; however, several zones of smaller
or larger area comprising a considerable number of
settlements also came into existence /Figure 2/-
The system of zones of attraction of the network
Hajdú, Zoltán: Reforms of administrative division in Hungary 1950–1984. Ed:. Orosz Éva, Pécs:
Centre for Regional Studies. Discussion Papers 1988. Spatial Organization and Regional Development 36-53. p.
4 6
g a • •.
2 4',"
E §
(n
s g
4,
▪
U1
4.4
•
0-1
0
11)
▪
r-i
03
.,4
CO
CL
CO
•
0
ry
to
i
rr
te
f CO
ON
o
n
io
is
iv
CO
d
CO
e X
iv
t
tra
is
in
Adm
CV
UJ
CC
C7
Hajdú, Zoltán: Reforms of administrative division in Hungary 1950–1984. Ed:. Orosz Éva, Pécs:
Centre for Regional Studies. Discussion Papers 1988. Spatial Organization and Regional Development 36-53. p.
47
of settlements and the established order of the
relations among the settlements came to the front
in a relative manner when determ:7_ning the system
of territories or centres of the town-surrounding
administration.
As a preparation for administration on two
levels, 32 village councils were placed directly
under coumly adm:_nistration. These villages are
not integrated with the system of administration
of town-surrounding. The limits of the experiment
are characterised by the fact that in 11 counties,
no village:5 of direct subordination to the counties
have been organised.
The reform of 1984 is a result of compromises
of several kinds. The measure of changes of areas
and the sphere of activity of the reform were deter-
mined by the political-economic surroundings; while
the steadiness of the county boundaries played the
role of the fundamental limit. In some counties,
aspirations of various characters can be found, too,
when looking at the spatial structure of the recent
administrative division /Table2/.
In comparison
to earlier circumstances, a few counties /e.g.,Pest,
Bacs-Kiskun/ could evolve regional subdivision due
to the category of rural communities with urban ad-
ministrative status which contributed to the ea-
sening of tensions in the environs of towns. In
County Baranya, there are no rural communities with
urban administrative status although areas lacking
towns /e.g.,Sellye, S6sd/ could have been managed
more rationally.
5. Summary
It is obvious even from this brief survey
that the administrative reform was at all times
Hajdú, Zoltán: Reforms of administrative division in Hungary 1950–1984. Ed:. Orosz Éva, Pécs:
Centre for Regional Studies. Discussion Papers 1988. Spatial Organization and Regional Development 36-53. p.
48
linked to much broader social and political changes
and concerns. The transformation of administrative
division of territory was several timEs subordinated
to aims of everyday politics.
Amcng the administ/ative levels, the settle-
mEnt administration /town-village/ changed consid-
erably from the historical ease along with the
district as the medium level of administration. As
opposed to these cnanges, the counties have been
and contiue to be highly stationary; the functions
of counties have changed several times, but their
spatial order has been modified only to an insig-
nificant extent.
The possibility for change in the administra-
tive division of territories is determined largely
by the processes that had taken place up to now. At
the time of the reform of 7984, a long-term deci-
sion was mEde to proceed towards the two level sys-
tem in which the local councils /villages, towns/
are directly linked to the county council. This
decision does not exclude the possibility of further
changes in either the village or town structure or
even of carrying out a territorial correction of the
county system, even if it were not a comprehensive
reform.
The administiative organization of territory
also touched the population in a vigorous manner.
The consideration of interests of the populatior is
particularly important today, when the administra-
tion is adopting strongly a supplying character. On
both sides of the administrative boundaries, in our
country those of settlements and counties, the popu-
lation has a vigorous view of territorial identity,
and thus it is impossible to disregard its opinion
Hajdú, Zoltán: Reforms of administrative division in Hungary 1950–1984. Ed:. Orosz Éva, Pécs:
Centre for Regional Studies. Discussion Papers 1988. Spatial Organization and Regional Development 36-53. p.
49
when pondering the importance of administrative
reforms.
In the future, in case cf administrative
changeE of every kind, no matter how well-founded
and reasonable they are from administrative, eccn-
omic, geographical,etc. points of view, the opinion
of the population will have to be asked; morecver,
in some cases, its approval must be asked for, or
else the admnistrative division of territory will
lose one of its components, regarded very essential
today, its social reception.
References
ALSO, L./1935/ A kozsegszervezes alapElvei.
/Fundamental Principles of Organiza-
tion of Villages./ - Magyar Kozigaz-
gatAstudomAnyi Intezet, N2 19, Buda-
pest, 235 p.
BELLSZKY, P./1980/ A kbzigazgatAsi
beosztAs
foldrajzi terszerkezeti alapjai.
/The Geographical and Spatial Struc-
tural Basis of Regional Administra-
tion./ - Allamigazgatasi Szervezesi
Intezet, Budapest, 35 p.
FONY-6, Gy./1970/ Kozsegi igazgatas.
/Administration
of Villages./ - KozgazdasAgi 4s Jo-
gi Konyvkied6. Budapest, 353 p.
HAJDU, Z./1982/ Teruletrerdez4si torekvesek a ma-
gyar fol.elrajztudom6nyban a ket vi-
16ghAboru kozott.
/Endeavours for
a territorial redivision tn Hunga-
rian Geography between the Twc World
Wars/. - Foldrajzi Kozlemenyek, 30.
/106/, pp, 89-106.
Hajdú, Zoltán: Reforms of administrative division in Hungary 1950–1984. Ed:. Orosz Éva, Pécs:
Centre for Regional Studies. Discussion Papers 1988. Spatial Organization and Regional Development 36-53. p.
50
HAJDU, Z./1984/ Geography and Reforms of Administra-
tive Areas in Hungary. Eds. ENYEDI,
Gy.
PECST, M.: Geographical Essays
in Hunge/T, ICC Hungarian National
Committee, Budapest, pp. 57 - 67.
HAJDU, Z./1987/Administrative geography and reforms
of the administrative areas in Hun-
gary. Political Geography Quarterly.
Vol. 6, N2 3, July. pI. 269 - 278,
HENGZ, A./1973/ Tertiletrendezesi Tdrekvesek Magyar-
orszigon. /EnCeavours in County
planning in Hungary./ KozgazdasAgi
es Jogi Konyvkiad6. Budapest, 678 p.
KARA, P. - KILENYT, G. - KoKENYESI, J. -
- VEREBELYI, I./1983/ A varoskornyeki igazgatasi
rendszer mtkodese. /Functioning. ofthe
System of Town-surrouneings./ - Al-
lamigazgatAsi Szervezesi Int4zet.
BudapeEt, 220 p.
LFTTRICH, E./1975/ Teleptilesh616zat
urbanizAcio
igazgatAs. /Settlement network -
- urbanization - administration./
Magyar Tudome,ny.os Akad6mia Allam-
4s Jogtudomenyi Int4zete. Budapest,
97 P.
MADARASZ, T./1971/ Varosigazgatas 4s urbanizAcio.
/Town Administration and Urbaniza-
tion./ - KOzgazdas6gi es Jogi Ktinyv-
kiad6. Budapest, 530 p.
SZAMEL., K./1981/ A megyerendszer fejleid6senek tort4-
nets Magyarorszagon. /The History of
the Developmert of the County System
in Hungary./ - Allamigazgatasi Szer-
Hajdú, Zoltán: Reforms of administrative division in Hungary 1950–1984. Ed:. Orosz Éva, Pécs:
Centre for Regional Studies. Discussion Papers 1988. Spatial Organization and Regional Development 36-53. p.
51
SZOBCSZLAI, Gy.
VIENER, Gy./080/ Telerillesfej-
lesztes, teleptil4si vonzasfunkci6
es kozigazgatas. /Development of
Settlement, Function of Attrac-
tion and Administration,/ - Al-
lamigazgatasi Szervezesi Int4zet.
Budapest, 74 p.
Hajdú, Zoltán: Reforms of administrative division in Hungary 1950–1984. Ed:. Orosz Éva, Pécs:
Centre for Regional Studies. Discussion Papers 1988. Spatial Organization and Regional Development 36-53. p.
5 2
I-,
I-A
I-'
I-A
-<
CD
\
0
\
0
•D
\C)
CD
OD
--,1
0 \
Lr.
OD
s-s
0
CD
0
0
F-1
CD
COUfl
I.-.
I--.
F.-.
I--.
\
0
\
0
s.0
\
0
di
st
I-'
1.---,
I--,
r
CO
CD
tN)
.F-
\
A
-.-I
CO
0
•
F-• •
cr)
r+
surro
town-
mb
1-• •
er
CD
undi
0_
•
n
•
g
o f
0
tow
\ID
-A
0
\
VI
Ch
LA
L..1
-F-
1,7
CD
fr)
LA
LA
LA
L4
FA'
1
0
I-.
IL)
F.--.
r+
NJ
LT1
I-,
0
\
0
ON
I-A
0
\
ID
cil
r •
with i
N
s
umb
am
nd
on
17
e
g th
er
pend
11
aq
e
ent
mq.
o f
vill
aa
u
coun-
a
ge
1
6
s
V
ill
-05
am
with
on
0861
g th
comm
a
1440
ges
e
on
vil
co
l
a
un
ges
cil
s
▪ •
Hajdú, Zoltán: Reforms of administrative division in Hungary 1950–1984. •
Ed:. Orosz Éva, Pécs:
Centre for Regional Studies. Discussion Papers 1988. Spatial Organization and Regional Development 36-53. p.
5 3
I N < < -4 (/) (1) (f)
-0 Z 7‘ 2 1 0 -n 0 Co CO 03 03 CO
C
co CD co 0 N N 0 cl, O. 0 CO 0, .< CO 0 0 CD- 0. to C
7 . 0 0 . 0 co a 0 . S < L-.. Oe L. 0 -s 7- 0 7 o_
.
co N
•
C)
n . 0- 0 ,-1 7 il, co O. 7 0. 0 0 0- LO 0 co
0
"0
CD 7 o n
O
co
0- 7 Co 0. 1 -1 LO 0 Lo i 7 -0
7
c
7
0 . -<
o_ o
1 CD
7 O.
7 -< a)
•.<
x. 0
S
CO 0
co- 1
H. 0) 0
a
1-.. -0
0_ >
0
L-t
H. co
0- 7
0-
,
0
(!ii
0 0
O
C
N
7 7
0)
c.,.
,
`1.
LO
Gs
GI A GI Gs
Ul CD al N N 1,1 CO-1, A AV ul CO A
0
>
0 V CD Us
01 LC) 0 Gs LA N CI, 10
N
CD GI A LA
O
7
GI CO CO LA 0 0 Gi
OD A LA
M A GI al Co N
/1.
CD
0)
01
al A CO 01 GS V CO CI, A A 0 V
N
N
r V LA
4, CO
CO LO U, 0
U, ul 01 N 0, 0) CO Lo
0 0
0_
CO 0 CO N
LO 0 A CO N U,
N
OD -A LA 0
7
0
-0
0
Us
N
4,
LA GI LC) N
L11 4, A A CO A LA
A 0
-0
fff
0
CO CO al A CO U1 CO
GI
N
ln N N
0 us 0) us 01
-1
0 a, a) A OD (A V CO us CO GI
Lt3 GI A Gs
Gs A
1-f
GI CD m
Los V IV N
N
0 LO Lo. CD
N 0 V Gs
?2,
LA 0, N 0 Lo. V CO 00 0
0) V GI Ul U7 03 CO 0
UT CO Ul 4, V LA A GI 0 LC>
CA 0,
CLs
. 0, OD
0
7
GAT
0
TATp
0
Ul
LA CO CP U, V CO U,
Gl Co A A LI)
Ul LO 0) 0, L11
O I
7
0_
tO
f D
'Jot
7*7,0)
H• 7 C
r-s
7- H• 7
0
A .rr I .1-4L4014.1..N I CAN.Gs
I I
ff) -0 0
L-L co 0 c
0 . 7 7
7 L-) 3 1
c7 7
0
L-L
0
7
(.11 CO al 01 CO 03 (0 OD (A 03 .1, Ul
M
01 CO LA
LT)
0
LD N10Nr
N10r.
.N
l/1
0
0, 0 ul Gs 01 0 co
V 0 N LO Gs
LO
V OD A A 0 GI A LC) OD LA .
0)
7 0
<
r
'
CO 0, 0) 01
(JI
A 0
N
Ln
A Co A V 0, 4, Lo
LO
0)
<
0, Ln a, LA CO us
N
N
CO CO v
0)
(0
1-1 0
0 0
0 < IA 0 H.
cl,
0 H. 3 0 7
00
.
Gs N A
OD.usCANG1 AGSMUILD r 1 C . 0 C 0_
. N IV CD Gl 00 OD A CO OD 0 GI 1--1 LA U, . N 0 1-1 1-,
7 1.., 7 7 co
0 co (0 0 -0
H ..
1-1. CD
. 0) .-1. . 7
ID
7- LO 0_
nN
0 0
w
Jaq
< co 0
0 , B o
0
Ln
04
N
1-4
03
C 0 C
0 f.f.1
4,
1,1 (.4 V 0 1.0 Us A U, 0
0 A 0 1.0 CO
03 I
n
n 7
0 co . 0
1-1 CD f+
fl)
7" 0
CD
0 1-1 < Z
0 0 1-1. C
I--,
C 0 s-s
L11
I--. I—. H
, ,
I—.
N
7 0) 7-
V CO 4, A 4, N . V A 01 10 LA Gs CO GI . CO . V .
O
0 0)
0, U1 0, A
,4 N , 0 Or, 0 ,44 r N tr, 4, Q4 CO 0 0 A
C
O
0 0