Reform projects of M.M. Speransky (1808-18012)

Transformations of the highest authorities

Alexander I, ascending the throne, wanted to carry out a series of reforms in Russia. To do this, he united his liberal friends in the "Secret Committee". The creation and implementation of reforms progressed very slowly, the reformers had no idea about the real state administration. They needed a person who could translate ideas into real projects.

And this person was M.M. Speransky.

In 1808, the tsar ordered to create M.M. Speransky general plan reforms. Mikhail Speransky was engaged in this work for almost a year. The reform plan was presented in the form of an extensive document: "Introduction to the Code state laws". In it, he expressed his personal opinion on specific problems of state development and the rule of law, and also explained and substantiated his thoughts. In 1809, MM Speransky wrote: "If God bless all these undertakings, then by 1811, by the end of the decade of the present reign, Russia will perceive a new being and will completely transform in all parts." In the plan of M.M. Speransky, the principle of separation of powers, under the supremacy of the power of an autocratic monarch, was the basis of the state structure. All power in the state was to be divided into: legislative, judicial and executive. Prior to this, there was no strict separation of powers. Also M.M. Speransky proposed to introduce a system of ministries. He proposed making an elective State Duma and a State Council appointed by the tsar. Civil and political rights were introduced, that is, it was a question of a constitutional monarchy. The State Duma is entrusted with the law. The Senate - the court. To the Ministry - management.

Reform of the Council of State (1810)

The transformation of the State Council became the most important of the reforms carried out by M.M. Speransky. On January 1, 1810, the "Manifesto on the Establishment of the State Council" and "The Formation of the State Council" were published, regulating the activities of this body. Both documents were written by M.M. Speransky himself. Changing the functions of the Council pursued the same goal as the reorganization of all branches of government: to protect all estates from despotism and favoritism. Objectively, this meant a certain limitation of the autocracy, since the relative independence of all branches of government was created and they became accountable to the estates. The preparation of the reform was carried out in an atmosphere of secrecy and came as a complete surprise to many.

Its significance in the management system is expressed in the Manifesto of January 1 by the definition that in it "all parts of government in their main relation to legislation are aligned and through it ascend to the supreme power." This means that the Council of State discusses all the details of the state structure, as far as they require new laws, and presents its considerations to the discretion of the supreme power. Thus, a firm legal order was established. In this sense, M.M.Speransky defines the significance of the Council in his reply to the sovereign about the activities of the institution in 1810, saying that the Council was "established in order to give the legislative power, hitherto scattered and scattered, a new outline of constancy and uniformity." Such an outline, communicated to the legislation, with three features indicated in the law characterizes the new institution:

“… I. In the order of state institutions, the council represents an estate in which all actions of the legislative, judicial and executive order in their main relations are combined and through it ascend to sovereign power and are poured out of it.

II. Therefore, all laws, statutes and institutions in their first outlines are proposed and considered in the Council of State and then, by the action of the sovereign power, they go to their intended performance in the legislative, judicial and executive order.

III. No law, statute or institution proceeds from the council and cannot have its implementation without the approval of the sovereign authority. ... ".

The terms of reference of the Council of State are very broad. His competence included: all subjects requiring a new law, statute or institution; items of internal management requiring the cancellation, limitation or addition of previous provisions; cases requiring an explanation of their true meaning in laws, statutes and institutions; general measures and orders acceptable for the successful implementation of existing laws, statutes and institutions; general domestic measures, acceptable in extreme cases; declaration of war, conclusion of peace and other important external measures; annual estimates of general government revenues and expenditures and emergency financial measures; all cases in which any part of state income or property is transferred to private ownership; reports of all the offices of ministerial departments, managed by secretaries of state, who were subordinate to the secretary of state. This title was entrusted to M.M. Speransky himself. For the conduct of affairs in the Council, a State Chancellery was established under the direction of Secretary of State reporting issues at the general meeting and head of the entire executive department. The Council had a commission for drafting laws and a commission for petitions.

However, analysis of the manifesto shows that the establishment of the State Council ignored the basic principles of state reform, reflected in the "Introduction to the Code of State Laws." The council was planned as an advisory body under the emperor. However, in the manifesto he himself wrote, the Council of State appears as an exclusively legislative body. All activity on the creation of laws was in the hands of the emperor, since he appointed all the members of the State Council himself. In total, 35 people were appointed to the Council, together with the chairmen and ministers.

The decisions of the Council were adopted by a majority vote. Those members of the Council who did not agree with the majority could write their dissenting opinion in the journal, but this had no influence. All laws and statutes were to be approved by the monarch and published in the form of a royal manifesto, which began with the words: "Taking into account the opinion of the State Council." Alexander I often ignored the opinion of the majority of the Council and often supported the minority. The Council of State was inundated with various questions not peculiar to it. The Council considers either the cost and income estimates for Moscow and St. Petersburg, or criminal civil cases. The emperor began to issue laws without considering them in the Council.

Thus, the reform of the State Council was carried out, according to the reform, the Council had to discuss all the details of the state structure and decide how much they require new laws, and then submit their proposals to the court of the supreme power, but in practice everything was different. Alexander I neglected this.

Reform of ministries (1810-1811)

Ministerial reform began even before the transformation of the State Council. The manifesto of July 25, 1810 promulgated a "new division of state affairs in the executive order" with a detailed definition of the limits of their activities and the degree of their responsibility. The manifesto repeated all the main thoughts and proposals of M.M. Speransky. The next manifesto - the "General institution of ministries" of June 25, 1811, announced the formation of ministries, determined their staff, the procedure for appointment, dismissal, promotions, and the procedure for conducting cases. The degree and limits of the power of ministers, their relations with the legislative branch and, finally, the responsibility of both ministers and various officials who belonged to the ministerial offices and departments have been determined.

Each ministry has received a uniform structural design. According to the "General Mandate", the ministry was headed by a minister appointed by the emperor and actually responsible to him. The apparatus of the ministries consisted of several departments headed by the director, and they, in turn, were divided into departments headed by the chief. The departments were divided into tables led by the clerk. All work of the ministries was based on the principle of one-man management. The "General Mandate" categorically stipulated that only the executive power belongs to the ministers and that "no new institution or the abolition of the previous one is included in their competence." Ministers appointed and dismissed officials, supervised institutions subordinate to the ministry. The 1811 Manifesto essentially gave ministers unlimited power in their industry.

On March 20, 1812, the "Establishment of the Committee of Ministers" was promulgated. This document defined it as the highest administrative body. The committee consisted of 15 members: 8 ministers, 4 chairmen of departments of the State Council, the commander-in-chief of St. Petersburg, the chief of the General Staff and the chief of the naval staff. Prince N.I.Saltykov was the Chairman of the Committee, but the cases considered by the Committee were reported to Alexander I by A.A. Arakcheev. The Committee was entrusted with the consideration of cases in which "general consideration and assistance is required". The creation of such a body was nothing more than a complete disregard for the principle of separation of powers, subordination of the legislative power to the higher administration. Quite often, the Committee, on the initiative of one or another minister, began to consider bills, which were later approved by Alexander I. Instead of a body uniting and directing the activities of ministries, the Committee of Ministers either replaced ministries in its activities, or dealt with matters that were not characteristic of the executive branch. He could overturn the decision of the Senate and at the same time consider a minor criminal case at first instance.

It should be noted that M.M. Speransky was the first to introduce such a system of ministries, which we can see now.

Reform of the Senate (1811)

This reform was discussed for a long time in the State Council, but was never implemented. M.M. Speransky considered it necessary to urgently reform Since it was difficult to understand the main purpose of the Senate in the system government controlled... M.M. Speransky proposed to separate government functions from judicial and create two senates, calling the first Governmental, and the second Judicial. The first, according to his proposal, was to consist of government ministers, their comrades (deputies) and should be the same for the entire empire. The second, called the Judicial Senate, split into four local branches, which are located in the four main judicial districts of the empire: in St. Petersburg, Moscow, Kiev and Kazan.

The Senate reform project was considered first by the committee of chairmen of departments of the State Council in 1811, and then at the general meeting of the council. Council members overwhelmingly objected to the reform of the Senate. All objections boiled down to the fact that a change in an institution that has existed for centuries "will make a sad impression on the minds", the division of the Senate will diminish its importance, entail great costs and create "great difficulties in finding capable people both in clerical positions and in the senators themselves." ... Some members of the State Council considered that the choice of some of the senators contradicted the principle of autocracy and "would rather turn to harm than to benefit." Others opposed the Judicial Senate being the highest court and its decision to be final, believing that this act would diminish the importance of autocratic power. Many found the expression "sovereign power" in relation to the Senate inadmissible, since in Russia they know only autocratic power. The most significant comments belonged to Count A.N. Saltykov and Prince A.N. Golitsyn. They believed that, first of all, this project was not "in time", they considered it untimely to introduce into life a new institution during the war, financial disorder with a general lack of educated people.

M.M. Speransky compiled a set of remarks made. He attached a note to it, in which he defended his project with various arguments, yielding to opponents in trifles. In his Perm exile, M.M. Speransky explained the reasons for such a negative reaction as follows: for the most part stemmed from the fact that the elements of our government are still dissatisfied with education and the minds of the people who make it up, dissatisfied with the incongruities of the present things of order, in order to recognize beneficial changes as necessary. And consequently, more time was needed ... so that, finally, they would be felt and then they themselves would have wished them to be committed. "M.M. Speransky believed that the opinions of the members of the State Council are reduced to the opinion:" it is good, but not the time. " His opponents, having no weighty arguments against the proposed project, spoke only of its untimeliness. ”The majority of ministers were also against the reform (only three were in favor of the presented project). Otherwise, M.M.Speransky reasoned, it could not be ministers of the right to report personally to the sovereign and, according to these reports, announce the highest decrees, thereby relieving themselves of all responsibility.

So, despite all the objections, the draft Senate reform was approved by a majority of votes, and Alexander I approved the decision of the State Council. However, the approved Senate reorganization project was not destined to be implemented. The war with Napoleon was approaching, in addition, the treasury was empty. The Emperor decided not to begin reforming the Senate until more favorable times. “God grant,” wrote M. M. Speransky, “that this time has come! A strong bond of affairs of the ministry will always do more harm and concern than benefit and dignity. " Thus, the Senate has remained as it was.

Mikhail Mikhailovich Speransky (1772–1839) became one of the associates of Alexander I. He was born into the family of a poor rural priest. The boy grew up among the lower clergy. At the age of seven, he entered the Vladimir Theological Seminary. During his student years, he showed brilliant abilities. As one of the best students in the fall of 1788, he was sent to St. Petersburg to the Alexander Nevsky Seminary. Here the young man became interested in philosophy. In his reflections, he denounced arbitrariness, called for respect for human dignity and human civil rights. In 1791 Speransky graduated from the seminary and was invited to remain a teacher of mathematics at the seminary. Later he began to teach physics, eloquence and philosophy to seminarians. For four years of teaching, Speransky's education becomes encyclopedic. He improves his knowledge in philosophy, studies the economic and political life of the empire. Metropolitan Gabriel invites Mikhail Mikhailovich to become a monk. But he has other plans.

M. M. Speransky

In 1797 he entered the civil service. Under Paul I, Speransky worked in the office of the Prosecutor General. In March 1801 he was appointed manager of the expedition of civil and spiritual affairs in the office of the Permanent Council. V1803 Speransky became director of one of the departments of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, reporting directly to V.P. Kochubei. He prepared several political notes in which he substantiated the need for reforms: "On the fundamental laws of the state," "On the gradual improvement of the public," "On the strength of general opinion," "A note on the structure of judicial and government institutions in Russia."

When the Minister of Internal Affairs V.P. Kochubei began to send Speransky with reports to Alexander, the talented administrator interested the emperor. In 1807, Alexander brings Mikhail Mikhailovich closer to him, makes him secretary of state, and then one of his confidants. Speransky often accompanied Alexander on foreign trips, at diplomatic meetings. In 1808, he attracted the attention of Napoleon Bonaparte in Erfurt, where a meeting of the emperors took place. "Would you please, sir, $ - $ Napoleon asked Alexander, $ - $ exchange this man for some kingdom?"

Alexander I and Napoleon in Erfurt, October 1808 To the left of the tsar - M. M. Speransky.

introduction to the code of state laws

In 1808 Speransky became a member of the Law Drafting Commission, Deputy Minister of Justice. In 1809, on behalf of Alexander, he prepared a draft of future transformations called "Introduction to the Code of State Laws." In the introduction, Mikhail Mikhailovich named the reasons for the reforms in Russia: Great French revolution gives an example of what will happen in Russia if serious reforms “from above” are not carried out in the near future.

The $ - $ project is based on the principle of separation of powers into legislative, executive and judicial powers. This division, according to Speransky, should have been traced at all administrative levels, starting with the lowest $ - $ volost. To prevent revolutionary upheavals, Mikhail Mikhailovich proposed giving the autocracy the external forms of a constitutional monarchy: the separation of powers, the election of some officials, etc. Speransky attached great importance to such an elected local authority as the Duma. The Volost Duma was to be convened every 3 years. It was proposed to elect representatives to it from among the owners of immovable property (representatives of all classes) by number (1 representative from 500 male souls). The Volost Duma was supposed to elect its chairman, secretary and deputies to the District Duma (on the territory of the province, it was supposed to create from 5 to 2 districts, depending on the area of ​​the province). Duma meetings were to be held every 3 years. Its members must elect, in addition to the leadership, the District Council, the District Court and deputies to the Provincial Duma, which, in turn, in addition to similar procedures, would elect deputies to the State Duma, whose chairman (chancellor) would be appointed by the emperor. The monarch also received the right to interrupt the session of the State Duma, dissolve it and call new elections. He himself would also submit bills to the Duma for consideration, thus limiting its powers.

The supreme executive power, according to Speransky's project, became the ministries. Volost, district and provincial courts were elected by volost, district and provincial assemblies, consisted of criminal and civil departments; a jury trial was introduced. The main court of the country was the Judicial Senate, although the ruling Senate also remained.The Council of State became the coordinator of the executive, legislative and judicial branches.

According to Speransky's project, the entire population of the country was to receive civil rights. Political rights were received only by the nobles and the "middle state" (merchants, bourgeois, state peasants who elected the legislative State Duma and administrative district and provincial dumas, judicial bodies). Speransky was going to solve the problem of abolishing the serfdom of the peasants gradually, in several stages $ - $, first, to clearly define the obligations of the peasants by legislation, then grant the right to transfer from one to another landowner, and then $ - $ liquidate the serfdom.

From the document (Introduction to the Code of State Laws, 1809):

... I. State rights

1) Rights of the nobility

The nobility enjoys all civil rights belonging to the Russian in general. Over and above these general rights, the nobility has that special right that it is free from regular personal service, but it is obliged to send it in civil or military rank not less than 10 years of their choice, but without transition, except in cases determined by special law. The nobility has a special right to acquire inhabited immovable estates, administering them by law. The nobility has political rights in choice and representation, but not otherwise than on the basis of property. All free trades permitted by law are open to the nobility. It can enter the merchant class and other titles without losing its fortune.

... 2) Rights of the middle state

1) The middle state has general civil rights, but does not have special ones. 2) The personal service of people of average condition is determined by their ranks and trades by a special law. 3) Persons in the middle state have political rights over their property. 4) All free trades are open to them, and they move freely from one to another, having fulfilled the duties imposed on them. 5) They attain personal nobility by service, when they enter into it of their choice, but not before having fulfilled the service assigned to them by law.

... 3) The rights of the working people

1) The working people have general civil rights, but have no political rights. 2) The transition from this class to the next is open to everyone who has acquired immovable property in a certain amount and performed the duties that he owed to the previous state. The composition of this class. 3) The class of the working people includes all the local peasants, their artisans, workers and domestic servants. This is the reason for those rights that belong to Russian subjects in different states. In the section of these states, what is most respected is the gradual progress and transition from a state of a lower to a higher one. For this, in each state, a line is assigned, so to speak, connecting it with the next. Thus, the personal nobility associates the first state with the second. Acquisition of immovable property connects the second with the third, and thus the very persons who, by their position, do not have political rights, can desire and hope for them from labor and industry ...

This project has not been implemented. Speransky's activities displeased conservative circles, so Alexander did not accept his proposal.

From the document (S.F. Platonov. Complete course of lectures on Russian history):

If Speransky's role was limited to drawing up a project of transformations, little could be said about Speransky, since his project remained without any influence on the structure of society and the state. The significance of this project is more noticeable in the history of ideas than in the history of institutions: it served as an indicator of a well-known trend in Russian society and aroused protests against itself from representatives of other trends. Known note N. M. Karamzin "On ancient and new Russia", filed to Emperor Alexander against Speransky's project. The protective tone of this note and its harshness caused Alexander's displeasure: but Karamzin aptly pointed out that Speransky was in a hurry (or, rather, Alexander himself was in a hurry) with a general reform in the spirit of arbitrary borrowing from the side, from the very France, which the entire Russian society considered then a hotbed of political and social dangers. Perhaps the reform of Speransky was not carried out because Alexander was afraid of her early maturity and became convinced of its unpopularity among the dignitaries and officials around him who did not like Speransky.

January 1, 1810 the emperor adopted the Organization Manifesto State Council. The State Council $ - $ the highest legislative institution $ - $ consisted of 4 departments: the department of laws, considering bills of national importance, civil and spiritual affairs, in charge of justice, police and spiritual affairs, state economy, dealing with issues of finance, trade, science and the military. Subsidiary bodies under the State Council were the Commission for Drafting Laws and the Commission for Petitions. The drafted bills first went to the State Chancellery, which was headed by the Secretary of State. Speransky became the first secretary of state. In the early days of its existence, the State Council consisted of 25 members, by 1825 $ - $ out of 36. At the end of the 19th century. the number of members of this institution has reached 70 people. The State Council existed until 1917, retaining its legislative function until the establishment of the State Duma.

The conservative nobility achieved the resignation of Speransky. In 1812 he was exiled to Nizhny Novgorod, then $ - $ to Perm. In 1816 Speransky took the governor's post in Penza, in 1819 he became the governor-general of Siberia. He initiated the management reform of this region. Only in 1821 Mikhail Mikhailovich returned to St. Petersburg, became a member of the State Council and the Siberian Committee. By this time, Speransky's views on the monarchy had changed: he became a supporter of the unlimited power of the tsar. Speransky was the compiler of the manifesto on December 13, 1825, on the accession to the throne of Nicholas I. As a member of the Supreme Criminal Court, he judged the Decembrists. From 1826 he headed the 2nd section of His Imperial Majesty's own Chancellery, which carried out the codification of laws. Under the leadership of Mikhail Mikhailovich, the Complete Collection of Laws of the Russian Empire and the Code of Laws of the Russian Empire were drawn up. In 1835-1837. Speransky taught the future Emperor Alexander II legal sciences. In 1838 he became chairman of the law department of the State Council. M. M. Speransky died on February 11, 1839 in St. Petersburg.

Project of M. M. Speransky. Key points:

confirmation of the autocratic power of the emperor;

the principle of separation of powers, carried out only at all levels of government;

the principle of electiveness of the lower levels of government;

the key role of the State Council as a body in which all important government issues are discussed;

separation of the concepts of civil and political rights. Civil rights are granted to the entire population (personal freedom, the right to travel and conclude transactions), political $ - $ only to property owners;

a draft of the gradual abolition of serfdom (in three stages: determination of the duties of the peasants $ - $ granting the right to transfer from one landowner to another $ - $ complete abolition).

Management scheme of the Russian Empire according to Speransky's project

Speransky's project has only been partially implemented. 1810-1811 the State Council was established and the functions of the ministries were delimited.

Mikhail Speransky's political views were outlined by him in 1809 in an extensive note, occupying the volume of a book, "Introduction to the Code of State Laws," where he presented a program of broad transformations.

While developing projects for reforms in Russia, Speransky turned to the political experience of European states, which showed that Europe was characterized by a transition from feudal to republican rule. Russia, according to Speransky, followed the same path with Western Europe.

At the head of the reform was a strict division of power into legislative, administrative and judicial, as well as the division of powers into local and central. The vertical and horizontal division of the entire state political mechanism created a consistent system, beginning in volost institutions and ending with the highest government institutions of the empire. The lowest unit of management and self-government was the parish. The volost administration was divided into legislative bodies, courts and administrations, and the county, provincial and state administrations were also divided.

The central state administration consisted, according to Speransky, of three independent institutions: the State Duma (legislative branch), the Senate (judicial branch) and ministries (administrative branch). The activities of these three institutions were united in the Council of State and through it ascended to the throne.

The highest judicial institution of the empire was the Senate, which was divided into criminal and civil departments and had its seat in St. Petersburg and Moscow (two departments each). In the later edition, it was even assumed four locations - Petersburg, Moscow, Kiev and Kazan. Senators were to hold office for life, and Senate sessions were planned to be public. All court cases must be subject to Senate review.

In 1809, Speransky in judicial reform outlined in general terms what was partially implemented in the Russian Empire in the judicial statutes of 1864 - the separation of the peace mediation proceedings (volost judges) from the general formal, three courts of the general judicial system; trial by jury for the first instance and partly for the magistrates' court; independence of the court (either election or life); publicity.

The judicial hierarchy was supplemented by the Speransky Supreme Criminal Court, which is attached to the Senate and convened to judge state crimes, as well as crimes committed by ministers, members of the State Council, senators, and governors-general. The Supreme Criminal Court was composed of members of the State Council, the State Duma and the Senate.

The State Council, on Speransky's reforms, limited the decisions of the emperor. The emperor could not approve the opinions and decisions of the council, but their very formulation "heeding the opinion of the Council of State" showed that replacing these opinions and decisions would not agree with the provision.

The State Council was given broad powers - to consider and approve general internal measures (in the order of the executive), control over foreign policy, state budgets and reports of all ministries, powers in case of emergency. Members of the Council of State could attend the Supreme Criminal Court. The most important positions in the administrative and judicial hierarchy, if they were not elected, were replaced by ministers with the approval of the Council of State.

The proposals set forth by Mikhail Speransky looked very radical for that time, reflected Masonic ideas (Speransky, like many outstanding personalities of the Russian Empire, was a member of the Masonic lodge).

At the beginning of 1810, the State Council was established, where Mikhail Speransky became Secretary of State. The council, as suggested by Speransky, was divided into four departments: 1) laws, 2) military affairs, 3) civil and spiritual affairs, and 4) state economy. Each department was represented by its own chairman. In the general meeting, the chairmanship belonged to the emperor or to a person by his annual appointment. To handle the affairs of the council, a state office was established from secretaries of state under the main management of the secretary of state, who reported at the general meeting, presented the council's journals at the highest discretion and was in charge of the entire executive part. The post of state secretary, which Speransky held at that time, actually gave the powers of the second state person after the emperor.

Being himself one of the most important officials of the state, Speransky understood the importance of the bureaucratic army for future reforms and therefore strove to make it highly organized and efficient. In August 1809, a decree prepared by Speransky was published on new rules for the production of civil service ranks. From now on, the rank of collegiate assessor, which previously could be obtained by seniority, was given only to those officials who had in their hands a certificate of successful completion of a training course in one of the Russian universities or passed exams on a special program. It provided for testing the knowledge of the Russian language, one of the foreign languages, natural, Roman, state and criminal law, general and Russian history, state economics, physics, geography and statistics of Russia. The rank of the collegiate assessor corresponded to the eighth grade of the "Table of Ranks". From this class and above, officials had great privileges, high salaries and the right of hereditary nobility.

In April 1809, a decree was issued that changed the order introduced during the reign of Catherine II, according to which nobles, even who were not in the public service, received the title of chamber junker or chamberlain and certain privileges. Henceforth, these titles were to be regarded as simple distinctions that did not give any privileges. Privileges were received only by those who carried out civil service. The decree was signed by the emperor, the authorship is attributed to Speransky.

On the initiative of Mikhail Speransky, in order to educate the enlightened elite of society, the Imperial Lyceum was created in 1811 near St. Petersburg. Among the first lyceum students were Alexander Pushkin, Konstantin Danzas, Anton Delvig.

The upper strata of Russian society perceived Speransky's projects as too radical, and, ultimately, the reforms he proposed were not fully implemented.

Under the influence of personal circumstances at the very beginning of the 1800s, Speransky became interested in mysticism, which corresponded to the public mood. For ten years he studied the works of Theosophists and Church Fathers. Denying the Orthodox Church and preaching the internal church, he linked the reform of the church with the Christianization of public life on the basis of universal Christianity, which Alexander I partially tried to implement when creating the "Sacred Union".

(Additional

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://allbest.ru

Introduction

speran reform state

In the first half of the 19th century, the state and public order of the Russian Empire was on the same basis. The nobility, constituting a small part of the population, remained the dominant, privileged class. The landowners, freed from obligatory service to the state, turned from the service class into an idle, purely consumer class.

State policy expressed the interests of the bulk of the nobility. The growing contradiction of the feudal system in Russia was reflected in the confrontation and clash between the liberal and protective ideology.

Alexander I at the beginning of his reign promised to rule the people "according to the laws and according to the heart of his wise grandmother." The main concern of the government was proclaimed the preparation of fundamental (basic) laws to eliminate the "arbitrariness of government." The court nobles were involved in the discussion of the reform projects. They discussed relatively minor issues and scattered reforms of some government agencies until the talented thinker and statesman M.M. Speransky (1772-1839).

The purpose test work is the consideration of the main projects of reforms developed by M.M. Speransky.

The objectives of this essay are:

1. coverage of the biography of M.M. Speransky

2. disclosing the essence of reform projects

3. consideration of the circumstances of the excommunication of Speransky from public affairs.

Chapter 1. Biography of M.М. Speransky

Mikhail Mikhailovich Speransky was born in January 1772 into the family of a rural priest in the village of Cherkutin, Vladimir province. His father assigned him to the Suzdal Theological Seminary. In January 1790 he was sent to St. Petersburg to the newly founded First Theological Seminary. After graduating from the seminary in 1792, Speransky was left as a teacher of mathematics, physics and eloquence, French. Speransky taught all subjects with great success. In 1795 he also began to lecture on philosophy and was promoted to "prefect of the seminary." A thirst for knowledge drove him to the civil service. He considered going abroad and completing his education at German universities.

Metropolitan Gabriel of St. Petersburg recommended him as his personal secretary to Prince Kurakin. In 1796, Kurakin, appointed to the post of Prosecutor General, took Speransky into government service and assigned him to head his office. Speransky brought him to the untidy Russian office of the 18th century. an unusually refined mind, able to work endlessly and an excellent ability to speak and write. For all this, of course, he was a real find for the clerical world. This prepared his unusually fast career. Already under Paul, he gained fame in the St. Petersburg bureaucratic world. In January 1797 Speransky received the rank of titular councilor, in April of the same year - collegiate assessor (this rank was given to the personal nobility), in January 1798 - court councilor, and in September 1799 - collegiate councilor.

In November 1798 he married the Englishwoman Elizabeth Stevens. His happy life was short-lived - in September 1799, shortly after the birth of his daughter, his wife died.

Speransky was distinguished by his broad outlook and strict systemic thinking. By the nature of his education, he was an ideologist, as they said then, or a theoretician, as they would call him now. His mind had grown up in persistent work on abstract concepts and was accustomed to treating simple everyday phenomena with disdain. Speransky had an unusually strong mind, of which there are always few, and in that philosophical age there were fewer than ever. Hard work on abstractions gave Speransky's extraordinary energy and flexibility to his thinking. The most difficult and bizarre combinations of ideas were easy for him. Thanks to such thinking, Speransky became an embodied system, but it was precisely this intensified development of abstract thinking that constituted an important defect in his practical activity. Through long and hard work, Speransky has prepared for himself a vast stock of various knowledge and ideas. In this reserve there was a lot of luxury that satisfied the refined requirements of mental comfort, there was, perhaps, even a lot that was superfluous and too little that was needed for the base needs of a person, for understanding reality. In this he was like Alexander, and on this they agreed with each other. But Speransky differed from the sovereign in that the former had all the mental luxury tidied up and harmoniously arranged in places. The most confusing question in his presentation acquired an orderly harmony.

Chapter 2. Projects of State Reforms M.M. Speransky

Alexander I, who ascended the throne as a result of the assassination of Paul I, at the beginning of his reign, promised to rule the people "according to the laws and according to the heart of his wise grandmother." The main concern of the government was proclaimed the preparation of fundamental (basic) laws to eliminate the "arbitrariness of government." The court nobles were involved in the discussion of the reform projects. They discussed relatively minor issues and scattered reforms of some state institutions, until the talented thinker and statesman Mikhail Mikhailovich Speransky (1772-1839) fell into the circle of the emperor.

On the instructions of Alexander I, Speransky prepared a number of projects for improving the state system of the empire, in essence, the projects of the Russian constitution. Some of the projects were written in 1802-1804; in 1809, extensive "Introduction to the Code of State Laws", "Draft Code of State Laws of the Russian Empire" and related notes and projects were prepared.

2.1 Public administration reform

A supporter of the constitutional system, Speransky was convinced that new rights must be bestowed on society by power. A society divided into estates, whose rights and obligations are established by law, needs civil and criminal law, public administration of court cases, and freedom of the press. Speransky attached great importance to the education of public opinion.

At the same time, he believed that Russia was not ready for a constitutional system, that it was necessary to start transformations with the reorganization of the state apparatus.

The period 1808-1811 was the era of the highest significance and influence of Speransky, about whom it was at this time that Joseph de Maistre wrote that he was “the first and even only minister” of the empire: reform of the State Council (1810), reform of ministers (1810-1811) , Senate reform (1811-1812). The young reformer, with his characteristic fervor, set about drawing up a complete plan for the new formation of state administration in all its parts: from the cabinet of the sovereign to the volost government. Already on December 11, 1808, he read to Alexander I his note "On the improvement of the general education of the people." As late as October 1809, the entire plan was already on the emperor's desk. October and November passed in almost daily consideration of its various parts, in which Alexander I made his amendments and additions.

The views of the new reformer MM Speransky are most fully reflected in the note of 1809 - "Introduction to the Code of State Laws." Speransky's "Code" opens with a serious theoretical study of "the properties and objects of state, indigenous and organic laws." He additionally explained and substantiated his thoughts on the basis of the theory of law or, even, rather, the philosophy of law. The reformer gave great importance regulating the role of the state in the development of domestic industry and by its political transformations strengthened the autocracy in every possible way. Speransky writes: "If the rights of state power were unlimited, if the powers of the state were united in sovereign power and they would not leave any rights to their subjects, then the state would be in slavery and the government would be despotic."

According to Speransky, such slavery can take two forms. The first form not only excludes subjects from any participation in the use of state power, but also deprives them of the freedom to dispose of their own person and their property. The second, milder one, also excludes subjects from participation in government, but leaves them free in relation to their own personality and property. Consequently, subjects have no political rights, but civil rights remain with them. And their presence means that there is freedom in the state to some extent. But it is not guaranteed enough, therefore - Speransky explains - it is necessary to protect it - by creating and strengthening the basic law, that is, the Political Constitution.

Civil rights should be listed in it “in the form of initial civil consequences arising from political rights”, and citizens should be given political rights by which they will be able to defend their rights and their civil liberties. So, according to Speransky, civil rights and freedoms are insufficiently provided for by laws and law. Without constitutional guarantees, they themselves are powerless, therefore it was the demand to strengthen the civil system that formed the basis of Speransky's entire plan of state reforms and determined their main idea - "rule, hitherto autocratic, to establish and establish by law." The idea is that state power should be built on a permanent basis, and the government should be on a solid constitutional and legal basis. This idea stems from a tendency to find in the fundamental laws of the state a solid foundation for civil rights and freedoms. It bears the desire to ensure the connection of the civil system with the basic laws and firmly establish it, precisely based on these laws. The transformation plan involved a change in the social structure and a change in the state order. Speransky divides society on the basis of differences in rights. “From the review of civil and political rights, it is revealed that all of them, in their belonging to three classes, can be divided: Civil rights are common, to all subjects of the Nobility; People of average condition; A working people. " The entire population was considered civilly free, and serfdom abolished, although, establishing "civil freedom for the peasants of the landowners", Speransky continues to call them "serfs" at the same time. The nobles retained the right to own inhabited lands and freedom from compulsory service. The working people consisted of peasants, artisans and servants. Speransky's grandiose plans began to come true. Back in the spring of 1809, the emperor approved the "Regulations on the composition and management of the commission for drawing up laws" developed by Speransky, where for many years (up to the new reign) the main directions of its activities were determined: "The works of the Commission have the following main subjects:

1. Civil Code. 2. Code of Criminal. 3. Commercial Code. 4. Various parts to the State Economy and to public law belonging. 5. Code of provincial laws for the provinces of Ostsee. 6. Code of laws such for the provinces of Little Russia and Poland annexed.

Speransky speaks of the need to create a state governed by the rule of law, which ultimately must be a constitutional state. He explains that the security of a person and property is the first inalienable property of any society, since inviolability is the essence of civil rights and freedoms, which have two types: personal and material freedoms. Content of personal freedoms:

1. No one can be punished without trial; 2. No one is obliged to perform personal service except by law. Content of material freedoms: 1. Everyone can dispose of his property at will, in accordance with the general law; 2. No one is obliged to pay taxes and duties otherwise than by law, and not arbitrarily. Thus, we see that Speransky everywhere perceives the law as a method of protecting security and freedom. However, he sees that guarantees are also needed against the arbitrariness of the legislator. The reformer approaches the requirement of constitutional and legal limitation of power, so that it takes into account existing law. This would give it more stability.

Speransky considers it necessary to have a system of separation of powers. Here he fully accepts the ideas that prevailed then in Western Europe, and writes in his work that: "You cannot base government on the law if one sovereign power will make up the law and execute it." Therefore, Speransky sees a reasonable structure of state power in its division into three branches: legislative, executive and judicial, while maintaining the autocratic form. Since the discussion of bills involves the participation of a large number of people, it is necessary to create special bodies representing the legislative branch - the Duma.

Speransky proposes to involve the population (personally free, including state peasants, subject to a property qualification) to direct participation in the legislative, executive and judicial authorities on the basis of a four-stage election system (volost - district - provincial - State Duma). If this plan were actually embodied, the fate of Russia would have turned out differently, alas, history does not know the subjunctive mood. The right to elect them cannot belong equally to everyone. Speransky stipulates that the more property a person has, the more he is interested in protecting property rights. And those who have neither real estate nor capital are excluded from the election process. Thus, we see that the democratic principle of general and secret elections is alien to Speransky, and in contrast to this, he puts forward and attaches greater importance to the liberal principle of the separation of powers. At the same time, Speransky recommends widespread decentralization, that is, along with the central State Duma, local councils should also be created: volost, uyezd and provincial. The Duma is called upon to resolve issues of a local nature. Without the consent of the State Duma, the autocrat had no right to issue laws, except for those cases when it came to saving the fatherland. However, in contrast, the emperor could always dissolve the deputies and call new elections. Consequently, by its existence, the State Duma, as it were, was called upon to give only an idea of ​​the needs of the people and to exercise control over the executive power. Executive power is represented by boards, and the highest level- ministries, which were formed by the emperor himself. Moreover, the ministers were supposed to bear responsibility before the State Duma, which was empowered to ask for the abolition of illegal acts. This is fundamentally new approach Speransky, expressed in the desire to put officials, both in the center and locally, under the control of public opinion. The judicial branch of government was represented by regional, county and provincial courts, consisting of elected judges and acting with the participation of a jury. The highest court was the Senate, whose members were elected for life by the State Duma and personally approved by the emperor.

The unity of state power, according to Speransky's project, would be embodied only in the personality of the monarch. This decentralization of legislation, court and administration was supposed to give the central government itself the opportunity to solve with due attention those most important state affairs that would be concentrated in its bodies and which would not be overshadowed by the mass of current small matters of local interest. This idea of ​​decentralization was all the more remarkable because it was not at all on the agenda of Western European political thinkers, who were more concerned with the development of questions of central government.

The monarch remained the only representative of all branches of government, heading them. Therefore, Speransky believed that it was necessary to create an institution that would take care of planned cooperation between individual authorities and would be, as it were, a concrete expression of the fundamental embodiment of state unity in the personality of the monarch. According to his plan, the State Council was to become such an institution. At the same time, this body was supposed to act as a guardian of the implementation of legislation.

On January 1, 1810, a manifesto was announced establishing the Council of State, replacing the Permanent Council. M. M. Speransky received the post of state secretary in this body. He was in charge of all the documentation that passed through the State Council. Speransky originally envisaged in his reform plan the State Council as an institution that should not be particularly concerned with the preparation and development of bills. But since the creation of the State Council was considered as the first stage of transformations and it was he who was supposed to establish plans for further reforms, at first this body was given broad powers. From now on, all bills had to go through the State Council. The general meeting consisted of members of four departments: 1) legislative, 2) military affairs (until 1854), 3) civil and spiritual affairs, 4) state economy; and from ministers. The sovereign himself presided over it. At the same time, it is stipulated that the king could only approve the opinion of the majority of the general meeting. Chancellor Count Nikolai Petrovich Rumyantsev (1751_1826) became the first chairman of the State Council (until August 14, 1814). The Secretary of State (new position) became the head of the State Chancellery.

Speransky not only developed, but also laid a certain system checks and balances in the activities of the highest state bodies under the rule of the emperor. He argued that already on the basis of this, the very direction of the reforms was set. So, Speransky considered Russia mature enough to start reforms and get a constitution that would ensure not only civil, but also political freedom. In a memo to Alexander I, he pinned his hopes on the fact that "if God bless all undertakings, then by 1811 ... Russia will accept a new being and will completely transform in all parts." Speransky argues that there are no examples in history that an enlightened commercial people remained in a state of slavery for a long time and that shocks cannot be avoided if the state structure does not correspond to the spirit of the times. Therefore, heads of state must closely monitor the development of the public spirit and adapt political systems to it. From this, Speransky drew the conclusion that it would be a great advantage for a constitution to arise in Russia thanks to the “beneficent inspiration of the supreme power”. But the supreme power in the person of the emperor did not share all the points of Speransky's program. Alexander I was quite satisfied with only partial transformations of feudal Russia, spiced with liberal promises and abstract discourses about law and freedom. Alexander I was ready to accept all this. But in the meantime, he also experienced the strongest pressure from the court environment, including members of his family, who were trying to prevent radical transformations in Russia.

Also one of the ideas was to improve the “bureaucratic army” for future reforms. On April 3, 1809, a decree on court ranks was issued. He changed the order of obtaining titles and certain privileges. Henceforth, these titles were to be regarded as simple insignia. Privileges were received only by those who carried out civil service. The decree, which reformed the procedure for obtaining court ranks, was signed by the emperor, but it was no secret to anyone who was its real author. For many decades, the offspring of the most noble families (literally from the cradle) received the court ranks of the chamber-junker (respectively - 5th grade), after a while - the chamberlain (4th grade). Upon entering upon reaching a certain age in civil or military service they, who had never served anywhere, automatically occupied "higher places". By decree of Speransky, chamber junkers and chamberlains who were not on active duty were ordered to look for an occupation for themselves (otherwise, resignation) within two months.

The second measure was published on August 6, 1809, a decree on new rules for the production of civil service ranks, secretly prepared by Speransky. In a note to the sovereign under a very unassuming title, rooted a revolutionary plan for a radical change in the order of production for ranks, establishing a direct connection between receiving a rank and educational qualifications. This was a bold attempt on the system of rank-and-file production that has been in effect since the era of Peter I. One can only imagine how many ill-wishers and enemies appeared to Mikhail Mikhailovich thanks to this decree alone. Speransky protests against the monstrous injustice when a graduate Faculty of Law receives ranks later than a colleague, nowhere and never really studied. From now on, the rank of collegiate assessor, which previously could be obtained by seniority, was given only to those officials who had in their hands a certificate of successful completion of a course of study at one of the Russian universities or passed exams under a special program. At the end of the note, Speransky directly speaks of the harmfulness of the existing system of ranks according to Peter's "Table of Ranks", proposing either to abolish them, or to regulate the receipt of ranks, starting from the 6th grade, by the presence of a university diploma. This program included testing the knowledge of the Russian language, one of the foreign languages, natural, Roman, state and criminal law, general and Russian history, state economics, physics, geography and statistics of Russia. The rank of the collegiate assessor corresponded to the 8th grade of the “Table of Ranks”. From this class and above, officials had great privileges and high salaries. It is easy to guess that there were a lot of people who wanted to get it, and most of the applicants, as a rule, were not young, were simply not able to pass the exams. Hatred for the new reformer began to grow. The emperor, having protected his loyal comrade with his aegis, raised him up the career ladder.

Elements of market relations in the Russian economy were also highlighted in the projects of M. M. Speransky. He shared the ideas of the economist Adam Smith. Speransky linked the future economic development with the development of commerce, the transformation of the financial system and monetary circulation. In the first months of 1810, a discussion of the problem of regulating public finances took place. Speransky drew up the "Plan of Finance", which formed the basis of the tsarist manifesto of February 2. The main goal of this document was to eliminate the budget deficit. According to its content, the issuance of paper money was stopped, the amount of financial resources was reduced, the financial activities of the ministers were brought under control. In order to replenish the state treasury, the per capita tax was raised from 1 ruble to 3, and a new, previously unheard of tax was introduced - “progressive income”. These measures gave a positive result and, as Speransky himself later noted, “by changing the financial system ... we saved the state from bankruptcy”. The budget deficit has decreased, and treasury revenues have increased by 175 million rubles in two years.

In the summer of 1810, on the initiative of Speransky, the reorganization of the ministries began, which was completed by June 1811. During this time, the Ministry of Commerce was liquidated, cases on internal security were allocated, for which a special Ministry of Police was formed. The ministries themselves were divided into departments (with the director at the head), departments - into divisions. The top officials of the ministry made up the council of the minister, and of all the ministers, a committee of ministers to discuss matters of an administrative and executive nature.

Clouds begin to gather over the head of the reformer. Speransky, contrary to the instinct of self-preservation, continues to work selflessly. In a report presented to the emperor on February 11, 1811, Speransky reported: „/… / the following main subjects were executed: I. The State Council was established. II. Completed two parts of the civil code. III. A new division of ministries was made, a general charter was drawn up for them and draft charters of private ones were drawn. IV. Drafted and adopted permanent system for the payment of state debts: 1) the termination of the issue of banknotes; 2) I sell property; 3) the establishment of the repayment commission. V. A coin system has been drawn up. Vi. The commercial code for 1811 was drawn up.

Never, perhaps, in Russia within one year have so many general state decrees been made as in the past. /… / From this it follows that in order to successfully complete the plan that Your Majesty will prescribe for himself, it is necessary to strengthen the methods of its implementation. /… / The following subjects in this plan seem to be absolutely necessary: ​​I. To complete the civil code. II. Draw up two codes that are very necessary: ​​1) judicial, 2) criminal. III. Finish the structure of the judicial senate. IV. Draw up the structure of the ruling Senate. V. Governance of the provinces in the order of the ship and the executive. Vi. Consider and strengthen ways to pay off debts. Vii. Establish government annual revenues: 1) By introducing a new census of people. 2) The formation of land tax. 3) A new device of wine income. 4) The best device for income from state property. /… / It can be argued with certainty that /… / by making them /… / the empire will be placed in a position so firm and reliable that the age of Your Majesty will always be called a blessed century. " Alas, the ambitious plans for the future outlined in the second part of the report remained unfulfilled (primarily the Senate reform).

By the beginning of 1811, Speransky also proposed a new project for the transformation of the Senate. The essence of the project was significantly different from the initial one. It was supposed to divide the Senate into government and judicial. The composition of the latter provided for the appointment of its members as follows: one part - from the crown, the other was elected by the nobility. Due to various internal and external reasons, the Senate remained in the same state, and Speransky himself eventually came to the conclusion that the project should be postponed. Note also that in 1810, according to Speransky's plan, the Tsarskoye Selo Lyceum was established.

This was, in general terms, the political reform. Serfdom, court, administration, legislation - everything found a place and permission in this grandiose work, which remained a monument of political talents far beyond the level of even highly talented people. Some reproach Speransky that he paid little attention peasant reform... We read in Speransky: “The relations in which both these classes (peasants and landowners) are placed finally destroy all energy in the Russian people. The interest of the nobility requires that the peasants be completely subordinate to him; the interest of the peasantry is that the nobles were also subject to the crown ... The throne is always a serf as the only counterbalance to the property of their masters, “that is, serfdom was incompatible with political freedom. “Thus, Russia, divided into different classes, exhausts its strength in the struggle that these classes are waging among themselves, and leaves the government the entire volume of unlimited power. A state organized in this way - that is, on the division of hostile classes - if it will have this or that external structure - both letters to the nobility, letters to cities, two senates and the same number of parliaments - is a despotic state, and while it will consist of the same elements (warring estates), it will be impossible for it to be a monarchical state. " The awareness of the need, in the interests of the political reform itself, to abolish serfdom, as well as the awareness of the need for the redistribution of power to correspond to the redistribution of political power, is evident from the reasoning.

2.2 Judicial reform

All strata of society, and most importantly, the ruling class were interested in the reform of the court. The judicial reform was a consequence of the so-called crisis at the top, the ruling elite's awareness of the need to create an effective mechanism to protect the individual and property. And, of course, the emperor Alexander II himself, as well as his brother Konstantin Nikolaevich, who adhered to even more radical views, acted as a supporter of judicial reform.

Preparation and principles of reform. The history of the preparation of the judicial reform goes back to the first half of the 19th century. In 1803 M.M. Speransky proposed a broad program for improving the judicial system, which was developed in the "Introduction to the Code of State Laws" in 1809. In 1821 and 1826. he returned to projects of judicial reform. However, the governments of Alexander I and Nicholas I rejected them, since these projects, albeit very timidly, proposed the implementation of certain bourgeois principles. In addition, judicial reforms could not be carried out in isolation, without addressing the fundamental issues of public life, primarily peasant life. As you know, Alexander I and Nicholas I were opposed to the abolition of serfdom. Therefore, the bourgeois principles of the equality of all owners before the law, which underlie the improvement of the judicial system of M.M. Speransky, turned out to be unacceptable and premature for feudal Russia, where more than 50% of the population was in slavery and depended not on the law, but on the will and arbitrariness of the landowners.

In the summer of 1857, Alexander II ordered to submit to the State Council a draft of the Charter of Civil Procedure, which was born in the bowels of Section II. The project was accompanied by an explanatory note from the head of the II department, Count D.N. Bludova. The project proceeded from the introduction of the adversarial principle of the process, it was proposed to reduce the number of courts and pay attention to a significant improvement in the quality of training and selection of personnel in the judicial system. The draft Charter provoked a controversial reaction, splitting the high-ranking officials into two main groups - liberals and conservatives. The former wanted a significant restructuring of the judiciary and legal proceedings, the latter - only cosmetic changes. Conservatives and, above all, Count D.N. Bludov did not want to follow Western European models and introduce the principles of orality, publicity, equality of parties in the process, and establish the legal profession. For the years 1857-1861. Section II prepared and submitted 14 bills to the State Council, proposing various changes in the structure of the judicial system and judicial system. The materials of the judicial reform amounted to 74 voluminous volumes.

The work became especially active after the abolition of serfdom. In October 1861, the preparation of documents on the judicial system and legal proceedings from the II Department was transferred to the State Chancellery. A special commission was created, which included the most prominent lawyers of Russia: A.N. Plavsky, N.I. Stoyanovsky, S.I. Zarudny, K.P. Pobedonostsev and others. In fact, it was headed by State Secretary of the State Council S.I. Zarudny. Fundamentally, the commission, which consisted mainly of like-minded people, took a path opposite to fornication. It was based on the general theory of the bourgeois judicial system and legal proceedings and the practice of Western European legislation. Of course, the fathers of the reform had to reckon with Russian reality and traditions and made certain adjustments to their projects, but at the same time they tried to prove that bourgeois institutions, for example, the jury and the legal profession, in no way undermine the foundations of autocracy.

The result of the commission's work was the "Basic Provisions for the Transformation of the Judicial Branch in Russia". In April 1862, this document was submitted by the emperor for consideration to the State Council, and on September 29, 1862, it was approved by him and published in the press. Simultaneously with the promulgation of the "Basic Provisions", Count V.N. Panin, who as early as February 18, 1860 was temporarily relieved from the management of the Ministry on the occasion of his appointment as chairman of the Editorial Commission. By the highest decree of October 21, 1862, a deputy (deputy) minister, senator, privy councilor - Dmitry Nikolaevich Zamyatin was appointed minister of justice.

D.N. Zamyatin was born in 1805 in the Nizhny Novgorod province. After graduating with a silver medal from the course of science at the Tsarskoye Selo Lyceum, he entered the service of the commission for drawing up laws, and then the II department of his own chancellery of His Imperial Majesty. Having built a reputation for himself as a capable, hardworking and impeccably honest official, he quickly moved up the career ladder. In 1848 he was appointed a member of the consultation at the Ministry of Justice, in 1852 - the chief prosecutor of the second department of the Governing Senate and a senator. In 1858 he was appointed to the post of Assistant Minister of Justice. He was finally approved as Minister of Justice on January 1, 1864.

The legislative framework. On the basis of the "Basic Provisions", four laws were prepared, which were approved by the emperor on November 20, 1864: "Establishment of Judicial Regulations", "Charter of Civil Procedure", "Charter of Criminal Procedure", "Charter on Punishments Imposed by Justices of the Peace".

The judicial reform radically changed the judicial system, procedural and, in part, the substantive law of the Russian Empire. The judicial statutes were built in accordance with the procedural and organizational forms bourgeois states. They proclaimed principles that were bourgeois in nature: the judiciary was separated from the legislative, executive, and administrative; the principle of independence and irremovability of judges was consolidated; the equality of all before the law was proclaimed, an all-estate court was introduced; the legal profession has been established; for the consideration of criminal cases in the district courts, the institution of jurors was introduced; an elected magistrate court was created to consider minor cases; the institution of forensic investigators, independent from the police, was established; the prosecutor's office was reorganized, freed from the functions of general supervision and focused on work in court; introduced the principles of orality, publicity, adversarial proceedings; the presumption of innocence was proclaimed.

Changes in the judiciary. Fundamental changes in the system of the judicial system of Russia were outlined in the "Institution of judicial rulings". Instead of the complex and cumbersome structure of the estate courts, two judicial systems: local and general courts.

The local ones were: justices of the peace and congresses of justices of the peace as the second (appeal) instance. Volost courts were also local. created in 1861; they tried cases of peasants for minor offenses, if persons of other classes were not interested in them and if these acts were not subject to consideration by general courts. The general courts were classified - the district courts and the judicial chambers as an appellate instance. This system was headed by the Senate, which was the only cassation instance for all courts of the Russian Empire.

2.3 Peasant reform

The peasant question was the most important issue domestic policy autocracy. Alexander 1 took measures to alleviate the situation of the peasants, but the steps in his solution of this problem were extremely careful. The emperor and members of the Secret Committee saw serfdom as a source of social tension, were convinced of the advantages of free labor over the serf, and perceived the landlord's power over the peasants as a moral shame for Russia. However, they considered it impossible to take drastic measures and adhered to the principle of gradualism. On December 12, 1801, a decree was issued, granting the right to own land to merchants, bourgeois and state peasants, who from now on could buy uninhabited land. Already at the beginning of his reign, Alexander 1 stopped distributing state peasants into private hands. The law of December 12 destroyed the age-old landowning monopoly of the nobility, who had previously enjoyed the right to acquire land as personal property. Encouraged by this first undertaking, some free-thinking landowners had a desire, entering into an agreement with their serfs, to free them into the freedom of entire villages. It must be said that up to this moment there was no law on such a massive emancipation of the peasants. So, the Voronezh landowner Petrovo-Solovovo made a deal with 5,001 souls of his peasants, giving them the ownership of the land they cultivated, with the condition that he be paid 1 1/2 million rubles at the age of 19. The son of Catherine's field marshal, Count Sergei Rumyantsev, conceived to release 199 souls of his peasants with land by voluntary agreement with them, but at the same time he submitted to the government a draft general law on transactions between landowners and serfs. The government adopted this project, and on February 20, 1803, a decree was issued on free farmers: landowners could enter into an agreement with their peasants, releasing them without fail with the land of entire villages or individual families. These emancipated peasants, without registering in other states, formed a special class of "free farmers". The February 20 law was the first decisive expression of the government's intention to abolish serfdom.

But, nevertheless, this decree had more ideological than practical significance: for the entire period of Alexander's reign, less than 1.5% of serfs passed into the category of "free farmers". That is, only 47 thousand male souls were released. But the ideas laid down in the 1803 decree later formed the basis for the 1861 reform.

In the Secret Committee, a proposal was made to prohibit the sale of serfs without land. Human trafficking at that time was carried out in Russia in overt, cynical forms. Advertisements for the sale of serfs were printed in newspapers. At the Makaryevskaya fair, they were sold along with other goods, separating families. Sometimes a Russian peasant bought at a fair went to distant eastern countries, where until the end of his days he lived in the position of a foreign slave. Alexander I wanted to suppress such shameful phenomena, but the proposal to ban the sale of peasants without land met with stubborn resistance from the highest dignitaries. They believed that this undermined serfdom. Not showing persistence, the young emperor retreated. It was forbidden only to publish advertisements for the sale of people in government publications.

2.4 Reorganization of the financial policy of the state

In 1809 Speransky was entrusted with the rehabilitation of the financial system, which after the wars of 1805-1807. was in a state of profound disorder. Russia was on the brink of state bankruptcy. With a preliminary survey of the financial situation for 1810, a deficit of 105 million rubles was opened, and Speransky was instructed to draw up a definitive and firm plan of finance. Professor Balugiansky wrote an extensive note on French, which Speransky revised and supplemented. She underwent a joint discussion with the participation of N.S. Mordvinov, Kochubei, Kampenhausen and Balugiansky, and then in a special committee meeting at the Minister of Finance Guriev. The plan of finance prepared in this way was handed over by the sovereign to the chairman of the state council on the very day of its opening, January 1, 1810. Here are its main provisions: "Expenditures must correspond to income. Therefore, no new expenditure can be assigned before a source of income commensurate to him is found. . Costs should be shared:

by departments;

according to the degree of need for them - necessary, useful, redundant, superfluous and useless, and the latter should not be allowed at all;

in space - general state, provincial, district and volost. No collection should exist without the knowledge of the Government, because the Government should know everything that is collected from the people and turns into expenses;

for specific purposes - ordinary and extraordinary expenses. For extraordinary spending, there should not be money in stock, but ways of obtaining it;

according to the degree of constancy - stable and changing costs ".

According to this plan, government spending was reduced by 20 million rubles, taxes and taxes were increased, all banknotes in circulation were recognized as public debt, secured by all state property, and the new issue of banknotes was supposed to be stopped. The capital for the redemption of the banknotes was supposed to be made through the sale of uninhabited state land and an internal loan. This financial plan was approved, and a commission for the repayment of public debts was formed.

The laws of February 2, 1810 and February 11, 1812 raised all taxes - some were doubled, others more than doubled. So, the price of a pound of salt was raised from 40 kopecks to the ruble; per capita serve from 1 rub. was raised to 3 rubles. It should be noted that this plan also included a new, previously unprecedented tax - “progressive income”. These taxes were levied on the income of landlords from their lands. The lowest tax was levied on 500 rubles of income and amounted to 1% of the latter, the highest tax fell on estates that gave more than 18 thousand rubles of income, and amounted to 10% of the latter. But the expenditures of 1810 significantly exceeded the assumption, and therefore the taxes established for only one year were turned into constant ones. The increase in taxes was the main reason for the popular murmur against Speransky, which his enemies from high society managed to take advantage of.

In 1812, a large deficit was again threatened. The Manifesto of February 11, 1812 established temporary increases in taxes and new duties. Public opinion made Speransky responsible for all these financial difficulties and tax increases caused by the difficult political circumstances of the time. The government could not keep its promises to stop issuing banknotes. The new tariff, 1810, in the compilation of which Speransky participated, was greeted sympathetically in Russia, but angered Napoleon as a clear deviation from the continental system. Finnish affairs were also entrusted to Speransky, who only with his amazing hard work and talent could cope with all the duties assigned to him.

The year 1812 was fatal in the life of Speransky. The main weapons in the intrigue that killed Speransky were Baron Armfelt, who enjoyed the great favor of Emperor Alexander, and the Minister of Police Balashov. Armfelt was dissatisfied with Speransky's attitude towards Finland: according to him, he “sometimes wants to elevate us (the Finns), but in other cases, on the contrary, he wants to let us know about our dependence. On the other hand, he always looked at Finland’s affairs as small, secondary business. " Armfelt made an offer to Speransky, having formed a triumvirate with Balashov, to seize the government of the state, and when Speransky refused and, out of disgust for denunciations, did not bring this proposal to the attention of the sovereign, he decided to destroy him. Obviously, Armfelt wanted, having removed Speransky, become the head of more than one Finnish affairs in Russia. Speransky sometimes, perhaps, was not sufficiently abstinent in his comments about the sovereign, but some of these responses in a private conversation, brought to the attention of the sovereign, were obviously the invention of slanderers and informers. In anonymous letters, Speransky was already accused of obvious treason, of dealing with Napoleon's agents, of selling state secrets.

The suspicious and very sensitive emperor at the beginning of 1812 noticeably lost interest in Speransky. Karamzin's note (1811) directed against liberal reforms and various whispers of Speransky's enemies made an impression on Alexander I. his. Starting to fight Napoleon, Alexander decided to part with him. Speransky was suddenly sent into exile.

Chapter 3. Weaning M.M. Speransky from public affairs

On March 17, 1812, after many hours and a highly emotional audience, accompanied by tears and dramatic effects, Alexander I dismissed numerous posts and exiled State Secretary M.M. Speransky. The closest employee and "right hand" of the emperor, for several years, in fact, the second person in the state, was sent with the police to Nizhny Novgorod that evening.

In a letter from there to the sovereign, he expressed his deep conviction that the plan of state reform he had drawn up was "the first and only source of everything that happened" to him, and at the same time expressed the hope that sooner or later the sovereign would return "to the same basic ideas." ... The overwhelming majority of society greeted Speransky's fall with great jubilation, and only N.S. Mordvinov openly protested against his exile by resigning from the post of chairman of the department of economy of the State Council and left for the village.

After Speransky was removed, a note in French began to circulate, the author of which argued that Speransky meant by his innovations to lead the state to decay and a complete revolution, portrayed him as a villain and a traitor to the fatherland and compared him with Cromwell. This note was drawn up by Rosenkampf, who served on the commission of laws and hated Speransky for overshadowing him with his talents, and was corrected by Armfelt.

In September of the same year, as a result of a denunciation that, in a conversation with the bishop, Speransky mentioned the mercy shown by Napoleon to the clergy in Germany, Speransky was sent to Perm, from where he wrote his famous letter of acquittal to the sovereign. In this letter, trying to justify himself, Speransky lists with the maximum completeness all possible accusations - both those that he heard from the emperor and those that, he believed, could remain unspoken. "I do not know with precision what the secret denunciations of me were cocked. From the words that your Majesty was pleased to say when I was excommunicated, I can only conclude that there were three main points of accusation: 1) that with financial matters I tried to upset the state; 2) bring the government into hatred with taxes; 3) reviews of the government ... The cruel prejudice about my ties with France, which was supported by the era of my removal, now constitutes the most important and, I can say, the only spot of my accusation among the people. your justice belongs to blot it out. I dare to say in the affirmative: in eternal truth before God, you are obliged, sir, to do this ... Finances, taxes, new regulations, all public affairs in which I had the happiness of being your executor, everything will be justified in time how will I justify myself when everything is covered and must be covered in mystery. "

By a decree on August 30, which stated that "after careful and strict consideration of the actions of" Speransky, the sovereign "did not have convincing reasons for suspicion," Speransky was appointed to the post of the Penza civil governor, in order to give him a way "by diligent service to cleanse himself to the fullest ". Here he still does not abandon the thought of state transformations and proposes, having cleared the administrative part, go to political freedom. To develop the necessary reforms, Speransky advises to establish a committee of Finance Minister Guryev, several governors (including himself) and 2-3 provincial leaders of the nobility.

In March 1819, Speransky was appointed governor-general of Siberia, and the sovereign wrote in his own handwritten letter that by this appointment he wanted to clearly prove how unfairly the enemies had slandered Speransky. Service in Siberia cooled Speransky's political dreams even more.

Siberian governors were notorious for their brutality and despotism. Knowing this, the emperor instructed Speransky to thoroughly investigate all the iniquities and endowed him with the broadest powers. The new governor-general had to simultaneously conduct an audit of the region entrusted to him, and manage it, and develop the foundations of primary reforms. He made a personal office for himself from people loyal to him. Then he began inspection trips - he traveled around the Irkutsk province, visited Yakutia and Transbaikalia.

Speransky understood that evil was rooted not so much in people as in the very system of government in Siberia. He established the Main Department of Trade of Siberia, the Treasury Chamber to resolve land and financial issues, took a number of measures to encourage Agriculture, trade and industry of the region. A number of important legal acts were developed and adopted. The result of Speransky's activity as Siberian Governor-General, a new chapter in the history of Siberia, was the fundamental Code for the Management of Siberia, which examines in detail the structure, administration, legal proceedings and the economy of this part of the Russian Empire.

In March 1821 Alexander allowed Speransky to return to St. Petersburg. He returned a completely different person. He was not a defender of the complete transformation of the state system, aware of his strength and sharply expressing his opinions, he was an evasive dignitary who did not disdain flattering servility even before Arakcheev and did not retreat before the commendable printed word to military settlements (1825). After the projects of transformations in Siberia worked out by him or under his supervision received the force of law, Speransky had to see the sovereign less and less often, and his hopes for a return to its former importance did not come true, although in 1821 he was appointed a member of the state council.

The death of Alexander and the uprising of the Decembrists led to another change in the fate of Speransky. He was introduced to the composition of the Supreme Criminal Court, established over the Decembrists, and played an important role in this trial.

Another important matter - the compilation of the "Complete Collection" and "Code of Laws of the Russian Empire" - Speransky completed already in the reign of Nicholas I.

Conclusion

Thus, the place and role of Speransky in the history of transformations of the national statehood and the formation of government legislative policy are generally recognized and have enduring significance.

It was Speransky who stood at the origins of the creation of ministries in Russia, which are still the core of the executive branch. He also created the State Council and the State Duma project. At the same time, his plan for a radical transformation of Russian statehood was implemented only to a small extent; nevertheless, he paved the way for the subsequent streamlining of the judicial and legislative system.

For the first time in Russian history, Speransky succeeded in codifying Russian legislation - under his leadership, the "Complete Collection of Laws" (56 volumes) and the "Code of Laws of the Russian Empire" (15 volumes) were created. Speransky's worldview was based on the desire to establish the rule of law in Russia, as opposed to the customary rule of arbitrary power, even if formally clothed in the form of "law."

Similar documents

Brief biography of M.M. Speransky. Plan for the transformation of the central government, the State Council, the establishment of ministries and the Senate. Reorganization of Russia's financial policy. Excommunication from public affairs and the restoration of Speransky in the service.

test, added 02/23/2012


Place of a talented thinker and statesman MM. Speransky in the history of Russia, his collaboration with Alexander I. Projects and directions of state reforms Speransky. Creation of ministries as the core of the executive branch.

test, added 07/05/2009


Biography of Mikhail Mikhailovich Speransky. First draft of political transformation. The question of the need to carefully introduce a constitutional monarchy in the country. Introduction to the Code of State Laws. Implementation of Speransky's reforms in practice.

term paper, added 10/23/2012


Formation and entry into the circles of power of M.M. Speransky. Transformation of the highest authorities. Reorganization of the financial policy of the state. Changes in the field of court ranks and production to ranks. The reasons for the failure of the reforms of Speransky and Alexander I.

term paper, added 03/04/2015


A brief review of the biography of M.M. Speransky. Political and legal views. Differences between civil and legal slavery. Speransky - a participant in the liberal reforms at the beginning of the reign of Alexander I. Reforms of public administration, their role and significance.

abstract added on 05/09/2016


Identification of the factors that influenced the strengthening of the state apparatus and the implementation of a number of reforms in early XIX v. Historical conditions for the formation of M.M. Speransky. The activities of M.M. Speransky during the reign of Alexander I and Nicholas I.

abstract, added 04/29/2019


The political situation in Russia in the first half of the 19th century. The personality of Alexander I, his reforms. Biography of M.M. Speransky, his appointment as assistant to the king, plans and some implemented reforms, as well as further activities in exile.

abstract, added 10/27/2009


The beginning of M.M. Speransky. Political reform project: intentions and results. Civil and political rights of the population. Elections to the State Duma, the main reasons for the State Council. The main reasons for the resignation of M.M. Speransky.

presentation added on 05/12/2012


Projects of State Reforms M.M. Speransky and N.N. Novosiltsev. "Introduction to the Code of State Laws" as the basis of the system of state laws. Development of the Decembrists' public administration system. "Russian Truth" by Pestel.

term paper, added 06/10/2013


MM. Speransky as an outstanding public and political figure in Russia in the 18th-19th centuries. The essence and content of the reforms proposed by Speranskiy, directions and project of their implementation, the expected benefits for the state. Reasons for the failure to implement reforms.

Mikhail Mikhailovich Speransky (1772-1839) - Russian political and public figure, author of numerous theoretical works on jurisprudence and law, lawmaker and reformer. He worked during the reign of Alexander 1 and Nicholas 1, was a member of the Imperial Academy of Sciences and was an educator of the heir to the throne Alexander Nikolaevich. Major transformations in the Russian Empire and the idea of ​​the first constitution are associated with Speransky's name.

Brief biography of Speransky

Speransky was born in the Vladimir province in the family of a church clerk. From an early age he learned to read and, together with his grandfather Vasily, constantly attended church and read the holy books.

In 1780 he entered the Vladimir Seminary, where he very soon became one of the best students thanks to his intelligence and ability for analytical thinking. After graduating from the seminary, Speransky continues his education and becomes a student at the same seminary, and then at the Alexander Nevsky Seminary in St. Petersburg. After finishing the last one, Speransky remains to teach.

In 1795, Speransky's public and political career began. He enters the post of secretary of Prince Kurakin. Speransky was quickly promoted in service and by 1801 he reached the rank of actual state councilor. In 1806, he met Alexander 1 and very quickly enters the emperor's location. Thanks to his intelligence and excellent service, in 1810 Speransky became secretary of state - the second person after the sovereign. Speransky begins active political and reform activities.

In 1812-1816, Speransky was in disgrace because of the reforms he carried out, which affected the interests of too many people. However, already in 1819 he became Governor-General of Siberia, and in 1821 he returned to St. Petersburg.

After the death of Alexander 1 and the accession to the throne of Nicholas 1, Speransky regains the trust of the authorities and receives the post of educator of the future Tsar Alexander 2. Also at this time, “ graduate School jurisprudence ", in which Speransky actively worked.

In 1839, Speransky dies of a cold.

Speransky's political reforms

Speransky is known primarily for his extensive reforms. He was a supporter of the constitutional system, but believed that Russia was not yet ready to say goodbye to the monarchy, so it was necessary to gradually transform the state system, change the system of government and introduce new norms and legislative acts. By order of Alexander I, Speransky developed an extensive program of reforms that were supposed to bring the country out of the crisis and transform the state.

The program assumed:

• Equalization of all estates before the law;
• Reducing the costs of all government departments;
• Establishing strict control over the spending of public funds;
• Division of power into legislative, executive and judicial, changing the functions of ministries;
• Creation of new, more advanced judicial bodies, as well as the creation of new legislation;
• Introduction of a new tax system and transformations in the domestic economy and trade.

In general, Speransky wanted to create a more democratic system with a monarch at the head, where every person, regardless of his origin, had equal rights and could count on the protection of his rights in court. Speransky wanted to create a full-fledged legal state in Russia.

Unfortunately, not all the reforms that Speransky proposed were implemented. In many ways, the failure of his program was influenced by the fear of Alexander I of such major transformations and the discontent of the nobility, which had an impact on the tsar.

Results of Speransky's activities

Despite the fact that not everything that was conceived was implemented, some of the projects drawn up by Speransky were nevertheless implemented.

Thanks to Speransky, we managed to achieve:

• The growth of the country's economy, as well as the growth of the economic attractiveness of the Russian Empire in the eyes of foreign investors, which made it possible to create a more powerful foreign trade;
• Modernization of the public administration system. The army of officials began to function more efficiently with less public funds;
• Create a powerful infrastructure in the domestic economy, which allowed it to develop faster and more efficiently self-regulation
• Create more powerful legal system... Under the leadership of Speransky, the "Complete Collection of Laws of the Russian Empire" was issued in 45 volumes - a document containing all the laws and acts issued since the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich.

In addition, Speransky was a brilliant lawyer and lawmaker, and the theoretical principles of management, described by him during the period of his activity, formed the basis of modern law.