按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
merely supporting life。〃 Few advocated the desirability of
establishing in each province a certain maximum and minimum of
land donation。 The members of the central committee were
favourable to the first scheme； and if the last prevailed； and
found its expression in the law； the explanation is to be found
in the opposition which the first plan met with on the part of
the nobility and their chief supporters in the higher official
circles。
One important question arose； whether the landlord should
still keep a certain executive authority within the limits of the
township； or whether the inner life of the village was
thenceforth to be subject to no other rules than those issued by
the village Assembly and put in force by its elected chiefs； the
elders or starostas。 The press almost unanimously expressed its
desire to see the realisation of the latter plan。 The country
people； said the press； required complete liberty； or； to use the
popular expression； 〃pure liberty。〃 Now this liberty was
inconsistent with the maintenance of rights such as those
exercised by the German noblemen in the Baltic provinces or the
junkers of Eastern Prussia。 The only way to render any revival of
personal servitude impossible was to establish the system of
peasant self…government。 Opinions differed on the question as to
whether the landlord ought to be a member of the township or not。
The Radicals were against it； and the Slavophiles did not attach
great importance to it； thinking that the landlord would feel
himself quite isolated amid the crowd of his former subjects。 The
Liberals alone were favourable to the idea of increasing the
number of township members by admitting all residents； without
distinction of class； to vote in the village Assembly。 Their
advice did not prevail； and the commune became a class
institution； to the great disadvantage both of the peasants and
of the whole State。
One of the most difficult points was undoubtedly that of
fixing the amount of remuneration which the landlord ought to
receive； not for the loss of his right over the person of his
former serf； but for that of the land he was obliged to cede in
his favour。 The question was the more difficult because the land；
in more than one part of Russia； had really no market price at
all； the nobility and gentry being alone allowed to bid for it。
The press； reasonably enough； insisted on the necessity of
establishing a correspondence between the revenue the peasant got
from his share and the amount of remuneration paid for it to the
landlord。 But such was not the opinion； either of the central or
local committees； and we must lay on their shoulders the
responsibility of the fact； that it was the amount of payments in
kind and the quantity of villein…service performed by the
peasant； which were selected as the base of valuation。 This
certainly was against the interests of the peasant； highly
overcharged as he was by the manorial lord； who obliged him to
pay rents much surpassing the revenue of the land he cultivated。
By not adopting on this point the views entertained by the press；
the reformers； as you easily see； did a great social injustice。
It was the press also which first agitated the question of
the desirability of the direct interference of the Government； in
order to facilitate the expropriation of the nobleman in favour
of the peasants。 The head of the central committee； Rostovzov； as
we have already seen； thought the financial difficulties of such
a measure insurmountable。 Such was not the opinion of the press；
which predicted that the issue of 〃rentes；〃 or Government bonds；
securing to the landlord a certain percentage on the capital
which he should cede to the peasant in the form of land； would
not lower the value of the paper money already in circulation。 It
was fortunate that in the end this method was adopted； for the
prophecy was not only realised； but the interests of agriculture；
and consequently of the country generally； were considerably
advanced by the capital paid in the form of these bonds to the
expropriated landlords。 More than one great landowner was deeply
in debt at the time emancipation took place； very few had the
capital needed for the economic arrangements required for the
substitution of the paid work of the free peasant for the unpaid
work of the serf。 They obtained it by selling or mortgaging the
〃rentes〃 or bonds paid to them by the Government。
We therefore find that on all points the press was the guide；
the authoritative adviser； the sure ally of the Government。 This
last character plainly appeared in the struggle which the central
committee had to maintain with the delegates of the provincial
Committees。 These bodies were composed exclusively of members of
the local nobility； and were empowered to present their opinions
on the impending reform。 Unconscious of the alteration which had
taken place in the intentions of the Government； they expressed
ideas in complete accord with those at first entertained by the
Emperor。 The majority in each committee； seeing that it was
impossible under present circumstances to maintain their old
rights over the person of the serf； consented to recognise his
freedom； and that without pay。 They were anxious about one thing
alone to retain as far as possible in their own hands the land
actually possessed by the peasant。 This feeling was the stronger
where the soil was rich； as was the case in the Central and
Southern Governments； where the black soil prevails。 It was less
so in the west and north； where the ground yielded but a small
rent。 We find a complete unanimity between the utterances of the
central and southern nobles； both insisting on the necessity of
limiting the expropriation of the land in favour of the peasants
to that occupied by their homesteads； whilst in the north more
than one committee consented to extend this to the arable land
and the undivided common。
The provincial committees were almost unanimous （I speak of
course only of the majority of their members） in their request
that the individual shares of each peasant household should be
readjusted according to a certain maximum and minimum fixed for
each province。 Many a committee insisted on the maintenance of
feudal police； if not of feudal justice； and all showed an equal
interest in the suppression of the uncontrolled power of the
bureaucracy in matters of provincial administration。
The minorities of almost every committee； who were more or
less influenced by the press； approached much more nearly in
their request to the views entertained by the majority in the
central committee。 They gave their consent to the plan of
expropriating in favour of the peasants a part of the noblemen's
lands； they insisted on the participation of the Government in
the act of redeeming the area formerly allotted by the landlords
to the serfs of their respective manors； they strongly opposed
the scheme of a transitory state in which the peasant； unable to
buy back the land he owned； was condemned to continue his villein
service and his feudal dues or payments in kind。 At the same time
they put forward certain general demands which went much beyond
the promises already given by the Government。 They made requests
for a general change in the existing system of provincial
administration。 According to these bureaucracy should give place
to a system of local self…government。 They insisted on the
necessity of amending the deficient judicial organisation。 They
demanded trial by jury and liberty of the press。 Some of the
members went even so far as to draw up a resolution in favour of
the general representation of the people and the revival of the
ancient system of National Councils； the Sobors。
We must not lose sight of these political requirements if we
wish to understand why it was that the Government； as soon as the
deputies both of the majority and the minority of provincial
committees were assembled in Petersburg； hindered their general
meetings。 It was but separately that each of the delegates was
admitted to put forward his requests； and to give oral advice to
the members of the general committee。 This mistrust on the part
of the Government embittered more than one of the delegates
against the members of the central committee； and threw them into
the arms of that minority which； in the central committee itself；
defended the interests of the nobility。 It was chiefly composed
of the 〃Marshal〃 of the Petersburg nobility； Count Peter
Schouvalov； Mr Aprakasin； who occupied the same post in the
Government of Orel； and Mr Posen； the delegate of Pultawa。 These
three gentlemen insisted on the desirability of keeping the land
in the hands of the nobility； and of granting to the peasantry
only a sort of soccage…tenure； or 〃censive；〃 on the land they
occupied。 Whilst the majority of the committee insisted on the
direct interference of the Government in the redemption of the
noblemen's land； and the propriety of putting an end to
villein…service； at any rate after a period of twelve years；
these gentlemen were in favour of leaving to a free contract；
entered into by the manorial lord and his former serfs； the
diffi