Speransky Mikhail Mikhailovich (1772-1839)
Count Mikhail Mikhailovich Speransky (1772-1839) went down in history as a great Russian reformer, the founder of Russian legal science and theoretical jurisprudence. His practical activities were largely related to the reform of the state legal system Russian Empire.
Speransky's activities
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 the educator of the heir to the throne, Alexander Nikolaevich. The name of Speransky is associated with major transformations in the Russian Empire and the idea of the first constitution.
Brief biography of Speransky
Speransky was born in the Vladimir province into the family of a church clergyman. WITH early age learned to read and, together with his grandfather Vasily, constantly attended church and read holy books.
In 1780 he entered the Vladimir Seminary, where he very soon became one of the best students thanks to his intelligence and abilities for analytical thinking. After graduating from the seminary, Speransky continued his education and became a student at the same seminary, and then at the Alexander Nevsky Seminary in St. Petersburg. After finishing the latter, Speransky remains to teach.
In 1795, Speransky's social and political career began. He takes the post of secretary of Prince Kurakin. Speransky quickly advanced in his career and by 1801 reached the rank of full state councilor. In 1806, he met Alexander 1 and very quickly gained favor with the emperor. 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 large quantities of 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 regained the trust of the authorities and received the position of educator of the future Tsar Alexander 2. Also at this time, the “Higher School of Law” was established, in which Speransky actively worked.
In 1839, Speransky dies of a cold.
MM. Speransky
Napoleon named Speransky “the only bright head in Russia.” During one of the meetings with Alexander, Napoleon talked for a long time with Speransky, then together with him he approached the emperor and said: “You will exchange this man (Speransky) for me for one of my kingdoms.”
Mikhail Mikhailovich Speransky was born on January 1, 1772 into a family of hereditary clergy in the village of Cherkutino, Vladimir province. At the age of 7, he began his studies at the Vladimir Seminary, where he was given the surname Speransky (from the Latin “hope”). In 1788, the Main Seminary at the Alexander Nevsky Monastery was opened in St. Petersburg; seminarians who were “most reliable in good behavior, behavior and teaching” were sent there, among them was Mikhail Speransky.
M. Speransky
M. Speransky was a very inquisitive and capable young man. He studied the original works of Diderot, Voltaire, Locke, Leibniz, Kant and other European philosophers and even then began to correlate what he read with Russian reality - and despotism, class prejudices, and serfdom began to be seen by him as an evil that must be resisted. But he prepared himself for spiritual service, and after graduating from the seminary he was left to teach mathematics and philosophy there, and in the future it was assumed that he would become a monk and begin to serve the church. But the young man wanted to continue his education abroad.
Career
His career growth began with the position of home secretary of the wealthy Catherine nobleman A.B. Kurakin and ascended rapidly. In Kurakin's house, Speransky became friends with tutor Brückner, the young people actively discussed ideas that especially worried them, read and argued. At the same time, Paul I, who ascended the throne, appointed Kurakin, a friend of his youth, as a senator, and soon as prosecutor general; in this regard, he simply needed a competent, intelligent and well-mannered secretary. He arranged things so that Speransky left the St. Petersburg seminary and devoted himself entirely to public service. Speransky's career rapidly went up: after 4 years he became an active state councilor, at only 27 years old. But at the same time, his personal happiness is also shattered: after living for only about a year with his beloved wife, he becomes a widower and subsequently devotes the rest of his life to his daughter, no longer getting married and having no heartfelt affections.
At the beginning of the reign of Alexander I, his young friends gathered in the inner circle of the young emperor, who formed the “Unofficial Committee”, which developed plans for reforming Russia: P.A. Stroganov, N.N. Novosiltsev, Count V.P. Kochubey, Prince A. Chartoryzhsky. All of them were against autocracy, believing that despotism is impossible in enlightened Russia, and the existence of autocracy is impossible without despotism, therefore, autocracy must be destroyed. Strange, but Alexander I himself was not embarrassed by such conclusions.
By this time, the name of M. Speransky was already known, he was known as smart and educated young man, so he naturally had to be one of the members of the “Unspoken Committee”. The Minister of Internal Affairs, Count Kochubey, invited Speransky to work in his department. He was valued for his extraordinary efficiency, hard work, and ability to competently formulate and formalize any legal issues. Speransky was a supporter of the idea of the primacy of law: “to make the fundamental laws of the state so immovable that no power could violate them.” The young reformer was convinced that the political system of Russia must be changed: despotism must give way to a constitutional monarchy. Speransky considered the enlightened sovereign to be the main instrument of reform.
The system of government in Russia at the beginning of the 19th century
Even then, M. Speransky understood that a system where three different branches of power are united in one person (the emperor) cannot be effective and ensure law and order in the state. Laws are ignored by society mainly because they are not enforced by the supreme power, therefore, laws are needed that everyone must obey. Therefore, according to Speransky, we must start with political reform, and then reform civil law. Note that such thoughts arose among the young reformer in a socio-politically stable time.
But the situation in Russia and in Europe as a whole was complicated due to Napoleonic wars: The defeat of Austerlitz, the unfavorable Peace of Tilsit, joining together with yesterday’s enemy Napoleon to the continental blockade of England led to a crisis of power in Russia, people talked in society about the need for a change of power... It was necessary to urgently change the situation - and Alexander I is relying on the young, but already very popular Speransky - he becomes his secretary. Even Napoleon highly appreciated Speransky’s abilities: after a personal conversation with him, he asked the emperor: “Would you like, sir, to exchange this man for me for some kingdom?”
In December 1808, Speransky was appointed Deputy Minister of Justice, and soon received the rank of Privy Councilor, combined with the post of Director of the Law Commission and Secretary of State of the established State Council. He was instructed to draw up a "Plan public education", which provided for the political reform of Russia. Speransky discussed all the details of this “Plan” personally with the emperor.
Reform plan
The essence of Speransky's reforms was that the laws necessary for Russia should be established in a short time and compiled into the Constitution. The main principles of the Constitution, according to Speransky, should be the following:
- separation of powers;
- independence of legislative and judiciary;
- responsibility of the executive branch to the legislative branch;
- granting voting rights limited by property qualifications.
“The government, hitherto autocratic, is established on an indispensable law.”
Speransky’s “plan” was completed by the end of 1809. It provided, in addition to what was noted above, the formation of the State Duma through multi-stage elections: volost, district, provincial and state. According to Speransky’s “Plan”, the State Duma did not have legislative initiative - the laws adopted by the Duma were approved by the highest authority, however, any law had to be adopted by the Duma, which also had to control the actions of the government to comply with the laws. Speransky himself characterized his Constitution as follows: “The whole reason of this Plan was to, through laws and regulations, establish the power of the government on a permanent basis and thereby impart to the supreme power more morality, dignity and true strength.”
V. Tropinin "Portrait of M. Speransky"
Speransky’s “plan,” truly reformist, at the same time did not violate a single noble privilege, leaving serfdom completely unshakable. But its reformist significance consisted in such provisions as the creation of representative institutions, the subordination of the monarch to the law, participation in legislation and local government population. All this made it possible for Russia to move towards a state of law.
Opal
The conservative Russian elite hated Speransky, considering him an upstart. In addition, his behavior did not correspond to the norms accepted in secular society: he did not have favorites or mistresses and remained faithful to his deceased, but dearly beloved wife, in addition, Speransky never took bribes and condemned corruption. Alexander I was convinced that Speransky’s transformative “Plan” was tailored from French constitutions and was unsuitable for Russia. In his “Plan” they saw a threat to autocracy... Under the pressure of constant reproaches and denunciations, Alexander retreated and sent Speransky into exile in Nizhny Novgorod, and then to Perm, which was very timely: Nizhny Novgorod during the Napoleonic invasion became a refuge for the nobility who fled from Moscow, who were hostile to Speransky. In Perm he found himself in an extremely humiliating position, without money, without books and under constant surveillance. Speransky even complained to the emperor, and he gave instructions to soften the conditions of exile for the Secretary of State.
Governor's post
On August 30, 1816, Speransky was appointed Penza civil governor. This meant the end of disgrace, forgiveness. Speransky immediately began active work: he took up local self-government, a reform plan for which he proposed back in 1808-1809. He introduced a rare practice for that time: receiving citizens on personal issues to study the true situation in the province. He proposed to strengthen the power of vice-governors and thereby relieve the workload of the governor, determine the amount of duty, give the opportunity and right to peasants to sue the landowner, prohibit the sale of peasants without land, and facilitate the transition of peasants to free cultivators.
On March 22, 1819, Alexander I appointed Speransky Governor-General of Siberia and gave him 2 years to restore order in Siberia, as well as propose a plan for the reconstruction of this region. This appointment showed that the emperor again wanted to bring Speransky closer to himself.
Years of exile adjusted Speransky's views and beliefs: now, instead of civil liberties, he advocated for civil rights, and in connection with this, he considered it necessary to reform provincial government. He drafted bills on governance issues Siberian region, and a special committee created by the emperor approved all its provisions in 1821.
“I wandered for nine years and five days,” wrote M.M. Speransky in his diary, returning to St. Petersburg in February 1821. Finally there was a meeting with my beloved daughter...
Coat of arms of Count Speransky
And already in August of the same year, Speransky was appointed a member of the State Council for the Department of Laws, and also the owner of 3.5 thousand acres of land in the Penza province he liked. His daughter Elizabeth was granted maid of honor.
Speransky enjoyed enormous respect both from members of the imperial house and from his opponents. It was to him that Nicholas was going to entrust the writing of the Manifesto on his accession to the throne, but it was he who was supposed to be included in the Provisional Government by the Decembrists in the event of their victory. Nicholas I knew about this and therefore appointed him to participate in the Supreme Criminal Court over the Decembrists, knowing that for Speransky this appointment was a difficult test, since he personally knew many Decembrists, and was friends with G. Batenkov.
Nicholas I, during the trial of the Decembrists, realized the depressing state of domestic justice, and therefore it was Speransky who was transferred the powers of the head of the commission to streamline legislation. By 1830, 45 volumes of the “Complete Collection of Laws” were published under the leadership of M. Speransky, they contained 42 thousand articles on the history of Russian legislation, and on the basis of this, work on a new “Code of Laws” began again under the leadership of Speransky. On January 19, 1833, at a meeting, the State Council decides that from 1835 the “Code of Laws of the Russian Empire” comes into force in full. Here Nicholas I took off the St. Andrew's Star and put it on Speransky.
A. Kivshenko "Emperor Nicholas I rewards Speransky"
In 1833, Speransky completed his work “Toward the Knowledge of Laws.” In it he outlined the evolution of his views and ideas. Now he saw the truth of life only in the fulfillment of the moral order created by God, and this order could only be realized in an absolute monarchy, when the monarch submits to the judgment of God and the judgment of his conscience.
Bottom line
In 1838, Speransky caught a cold and became seriously ill. On his birthday, January 1, 1839, he was granted the title of count, but he never rose again. Mikhail Mikhailovich Speransky died on February 11, 1839 and was buried in the Alexander Nevsky Lavra, where he began his career 50 years ago. Emperor Nicholas I, the imperial court and the diplomatic corps were present at his burial. Nicholas I repeated the same phrase several times: “I won’t find another Speransky.”
The grave of M. Speransky in the Alexander Nevsky Lavra
How is the rating calculated?◊ The rating is calculated based on points awarded for last week
◊ Points are awarded for:
⇒ visiting pages dedicated to the star
⇒voting for a star
⇒ commenting on a star
Biography, life story of Mikhail Mikhailovich Speransky
Speransky Mikhail Mikhailovich is a Russian statesman, political and public figure, count.Childhood and early years
Mikhail Mikhailovich was born in the Vladimir province in the village of Cherkutino on January 12, 1772. His father, Mikhail Vasilyevich Tretyakov, was a clergyman on the estate of the Catherine nobleman Saltykov. Mother - Praskovya Fedorovna - was a housewife. Mikhail was the eldest child in the family. He has early childhood There were health problems, but this did not stop him from learning to read long before his peers learned to do so. Speransky was a quiet and thoughtful child, with almost no contact with anyone except his grandfather Vasily. He loved to tell his grandson interesting stories from life. It was thanks to these stories that Mikhail Speransky received his first knowledge about the structure of the world, about the purpose of man.
At the age of six, Mikhail experienced an event that had a very big influence for his future life. The fact is that the owner of the estate, Nikolai Ivanovich, and Archpriest Andrei Afanasyevich Sambirsky came to his native village of Cherkutino. Samborsky really liked the smart boy, he often played with him, talked, and invited him to St. Petersburg.
In 1780, Mikhail was accepted into the Vladimir Diocesan Seminary. He was recorded under the name Speransky, which translated means “promising hope.” During his studies, Speransky discovered many talents and positive qualities– interest in reading, independence, philanthropy, modesty. In 1787, Mikhail became a “student of philosophy” and had the opportunity to become a servant of the rector of the seminary, Evgeniy Romanov. At the same time, Speransky visited Moscow, where he met with Samborsky. A year later, Speransky turned to him with a request to help him enter Moscow University. How Andrei Afanasyevich reacted is unknown to historians.
CONTINUED BELOW
Social activity
In 1797, Mikhail Speransky entered the public service. In the process, he drew up several projects for positive changes. In 1807, Speransky became Alexander the First's secretary of state, and a year later he became a member of the Law Drafting Commission. In 1809, Mikhail Mikhailovich wrote a plan government reforms, providing for the creation of a constitutional monarchy and the step-by-step abolition of serfdom. Of course, not all of Speransky’s ideas came true.
By 1810, Mikhail took over the post of Secretary of State of the State Council. A couple of years later, he was accused of secret connections with, because of which Speransky was forced to go to Nizhny Novgorod, and a little later to Perm. In 1816, Mikhail became civil governor (Penza), and in 1819 - governor general (Siberia).
Speransky returned to St. Petersburg in 1821. There he was appointed a member of the State Council and manager of the Law Drafting Commission. Five years after his return, Mikhail Mikhailovich became a member of the Supreme Criminal Court over the Decembrists, and also took a leading position in the management of the second department of the Emperor's office. From 1830 to 1832, Speransky created the Complete Collection of Laws and the Code of Laws of the Russian Empire. In 1839, Mikhail Speransky was given the title of count. In the same year, on February 23, Mikhail Mikhailovich died.
Mikhail Mikhailovich Speransky was born in January 1772 into the family of a rural priest in the village of Cherkutin, Vladimir province. His father sent 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, eloquence, and French. Speransky taught all subjects with great success. From 1795, he also began to lecture on philosophy and received the position of “prefect of the seminary.” The thirst for knowledge forced him to join the civil service. He thought of going abroad and completing his education at German universities.
St. Petersburg Metropolitan Gabriel recommended him as a personal secretary to Prince Kurakin. In 1796, Kurakin, who was appointed to the post of Prosecutor General, took Speransky into public service and assigned him to manage his office. Speransky brought the unkempt office of the 18th century to Russia. an unusually straightened mind, capable of endless work and excellent ability to speak and write. In all this, of course, he was a real find for the clerical world. This prepared the way for 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 by personal nobility), in January 1798 - court councilor, and in September 1799 - collegiate councilor.
In November 1798 he married an Englishwoman, Elizabeth Stephens. His happy life was short-lived - in September 1799, shortly after the birth of his daughter, his wife died.
Speransky was distinguished by his breadth of outlook and strict systematic thinking. By the nature of his education, he was an ideologist, as they said then, or a theorist, as they would call him now. His mind grew up working hard 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 extraordinary energy and flexibility to Speransky's 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 enhanced development of abstract thinking that constituted an important drawback in his practical activity. Through long and hard work, Speransky prepared for himself an extensive stock of various knowledge and ideas. In this stock there was a lot of luxury that satisfied the refined requirements of mental comfort; there was, perhaps, even a lot of superfluity and too little of what was needed for the base needs of man, 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 his mental luxury tidied up and neatly placed in its place. The most confusing question in his presentation acquired orderly harmony.
Speransky's rise began during the reign of Alexander I in March 1801.
Upon the accession of Alexander, Speransky was transferred to the newly formed Permanent Council, where he was entrusted with managing the expedition of civil and spiritual affairs. Speransky was appointed to the post of State Secretary under State Secretary Troshchinsky, and in July of the same year he received the rank of full state councilor, which gave the right to hereditary nobility. In 1802, he was transferred to serve in the Ministry of the Interior and appointed director of the second department of the ministry, which was in charge of “the police and the welfare of the empire.” All most important projects laws issued since 1802 were edited by Speransky as the manager of the department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. In 1803, on behalf of the Emperor, Speransky compiled a “Note on the structure of judicial and government agencies in Russia", in which he showed himself as a supporter of the gradual transformation of autocracy into constitutional monarchy based on a well-thought-out plan. In 1806, when the emperor's first employees were leaving the emperor one after another, the Minister of Internal Affairs Kochubey, during his illness, sent Speransky in his place with a report to Alexander. The meeting with him made a great impression on Alexander. The Emperor, who already knew the deft and efficient Secretary of State, was amazed at the skill with which the report was compiled and read. First, he brought Speransky closer to him as a “business secretary”, and then as his closest assistant: he began to give him personal assignments and take him with him on private trips.
In September 1808, Alexander took Speransky to a meeting in Erfurt with Napoleon. The French emperor quickly appreciated the modest secretary of state, who outwardly did not stand out in any way in the Russian delegation. Upon returning to Russia, Speransky became the person closest to Alexander. In addition to the military and diplomatic spheres, all aspects of politics and governance of Russia came into Speransky’s field of vision, and at the end of 1808, Alexander instructed Speransky to draw up a Plan for the state transformation of Russia. At the same time he was appointed associate minister of justice.
Childhood and youth
Mikhail Mikhailovich Speransky was born on January 1, 1772 in the village of Cherkutino, Vladimir province (now in the Sobinsky district of the Vladimir region). Father, Mikhail Vasilyevich Tretyakov (1739-1801), was a priest of the church on the estate of the Catherine nobleman Saltykov. All household concerns fell entirely on the mother, Praskovya Fedorova, the daughter of a local deacon.
Of all the children, only 2 sons and 2 daughters grew to adulthood. Mikhail was the eldest child. He was a boy of poor health, prone to thoughtfulness, and learned to read early. Mikhail spent almost all his time alone or in communication with his grandfather Vasily, who retained a wonderful memory for various everyday stories. It was from him that the future received statesman the first information about the structure of the world and man’s place in it. The boy regularly went to church with his blind grandfather and read the Apostle and Book of Hours there instead of the sexton.
Speransky subsequently never forgot about his origin and was proud of it. His biographer M.A. Korf told the story of how one evening he dropped in to see Speransky, then already a prominent official. Mikhail Mikhailovich himself made his bed on the bench: he put a sheepskin coat and a dirty pillow.
The boy was six years old when an event occurred in his life that had a huge impact on his future life: in the summer, the owner of the estate Nikolai Ivanovich and Archpriest Andrei Afanasyevich Samborsky, who was then chamberlain of the court of the heir to the throne Pavel Petrovich, came to Cherkutino, and later (from 1784) became the confessor of the Grand Dukes Alexander and Konstantin Pavlovich. Samborsky fell in love with the boy very much, he met his parents, played with him, carried him in his arms, and jokingly invited him to St. Petersburg.
Vladimir Seminary
Opala (1812-1816)
The reforms carried out by Speransky affected almost all layers of Russian society. This caused a storm of dissatisfied exclamations from the nobility and officials, whose interests were most affected. All this had a negative impact on the position of the State Councilor himself. Alexander I did not satisfy his request for resignation in February 1811, and Speransky continued his work. But the further course of affairs and time brought him more and more ill-wishers. In the latter case, Mikhail Mikhailovich was reminded of Erfurt and his meetings with Napoleon. This reproach was especially difficult in the context of strained Russian-French relations. Intrigue always plays a big role where there is a regime of personal power. Added to Alexander’s pride was an extreme fear of ridicule of himself. If anyone laughed in his presence, looking at him, Alexander immediately began to think that they were laughing at him. In the case of Speransky, opponents of reforms accomplished this task brilliantly. Having agreed among themselves, the participants in the intrigue began to regularly report to the sovereign various impudent comments coming from the lips of his Secretary of State. But Alexander did not try to listen, since there were problems in relations with France, and Speransky’s warnings about the inevitability of war, his persistent calls to prepare for it, specific and reasonable advice did not give reason to doubt his devotion to Russia. On his 40th birthday, Speransky was awarded the Order of Alexander Nevsky. However, the ceremony of presentation was unusually strict, and it became clear that the “star” of the reformer was beginning to fade. Speransky's ill-wishers (among whom were the Swedish Baron Gustav Armfeld, chairman of the Committee on Finnish Affairs, and A.D. Balashov, head of the Ministry of Police) became even more active. They conveyed to Alexander all the gossip and rumors about the Secretary of State. But, perhaps, these desperate denunciations ultimately would not have had a strong effect on the emperor if, in the spring of 1811, the camp of opponents of the reforms had not suddenly received ideological and theoretical reinforcement. In Tver, a circle of people dissatisfied with the liberalism of the sovereign and, in particular, with the activities of Speransky, formed around Alexander’s sister Ekaterina Pavlovna. In their eyes, Speransky was a “criminal.” During the visit of Alexander I, the Grand Duchess introduced Karamzin to the sovereign, and the writer gave him “A Note on the Ancient and new Russia"is a kind of manifesto of opponents of change, a generalized expression of the views of the conservative trend of Russian social thought. To the question whether it is possible to limit autocracy in any way without weakening the saving royal power, - he answered negatively. Any change, “any news in the state order is an evil that should be resorted to only when necessary.” Karamzin saw salvation in the traditions and customs of Russia, its people, who do not at all need to follow the example of Western Europe. Karamzin asked: “And will the farmers be happy, freed from the power of the master, but betrayed as a sacrifice to their own vices? There is no doubt that […] the peasants are happier […] having a watchful guardian and supporter.” This argument expressed the opinion of the majority of landowners, who, according to D.P. Runich, “lost their heads only at the thought that the constitution would abolish serfdom and that the nobility would have to give a step forward to the plebeians.” Apparently, the sovereign also heard them many times. However, the views were concentrated in one document, written vividly, vividly, convincingly, based on historical facts and a person not close to the court, not vested with power, which he would be afraid to lose. This note from Karamzin played a decisive role in his attitude towards Speransky. At the same time, the self-confidence of Speransky himself, his careless reproaches against Alexander I for inconsistency in state affairs, ultimately overflowed the cup of patience and irritated the emperor. From the diary of Baron M. A. Korf. Entry dated October 28, 1838: “Giving complete high justice to his mind, I cannot say the same about his heart. I do not mean here private life, in which one can truly call it kind person, not even judgments on matters in which he was also always inclined to goodness and philanthropy, but what I call the heart in a state or political sense - character, straightforwardness, rightness, steadfastness in the rules once chosen. Speransky had... neither character, nor political, nor even private rightness.” To many of his contemporaries, Speransky seemed exactly as he was described by his main biographer in the words just quoted.
The denouement came in March 1812, when Alexander I announced to Speransky the termination of his official duties. At 8 pm on March 17, a fateful conversation took place in the Winter Palace between the emperor and the secretary of state, the content of which historians can only speculate on. Speransky came out “almost unconscious, began putting his hat in his briefcase instead of papers and finally fell onto a chair, so Kutuzov ran for water. A few seconds later, the door from the sovereign’s office opened, and the sovereign appeared on the threshold, apparently upset: “Farewell again, Mikhail Mikhailovich,” he said and then disappeared...” On the same day, the Minister of Police Balashov was already waiting for Speransky at home with an order to leave the capital . Mikhail Mikhailovich silently listened to the emperor’s command, only looked at the door of the room where his twelve-year-old daughter was sleeping, collected some of the business papers at home for Alexander I and, having written a farewell note, left. He could not even imagine that he would return to the capital only nine years later, in March 1821.
Contemporaries would call this resignation “the fall of Speransky.” In reality, what happened was not a simple fall of a high dignitary, but the fall of a reformer with all the ensuing consequences. Going into exile, he did not know what sentence was passed on him in the Winter Palace. The attitude of the common people towards Speransky was contradictory, as M.A. Korf notes: “... in places there was quite a loud talk that the sovereign’s favorite had been slandered, and many landowner peasants even sent health prayers for him and lit candles. Having risen, they said, from rags to high ranks and positions and being mentally superior to all among the king's advisers, he became a serf..., revolting against himself all the masters who, for this, and not for any betrayal, decided to destroy him " From September 23, 1812 to September 19, 1814, Speransky served exile in the city of Perm. From September to October 1812, M. M. Speransky lived in the house of the merchant I. N. Popov. However, the accusation of treason was not written off. In 1814, Speransky was allowed to live under police supervision on his small estate Velikopolye, Novgorod province. Here he met with A. A. Arakcheev and through him petitioned Alexander I for his complete “forgiveness.” M. M. Speransky repeatedly appealed to the emperor and the minister of police with a request to clarify his position and protect him from insults. These appeals had consequences: Alexander ordered that Speransky be paid 6 thousand rubles a year from the moment of deportation. This document began with the words: “To the Privy Councilor Speransky, who is in Perm...”. In addition, the order was evidence that the emperor does not forget and appreciates Speransky.
Return to duty. (1816-1839)
Penza civil governor
On August 30 (September 11), 1816, by decree of the emperor, M. M. Speransky was returned to public service and appointed Penza civil governor. Mikhail Mikhailovich took energetic measures to establish proper order in the province and soon, according to M.A. Korf, “the entire Penza population fell in love with their governor and glorified him as a benefactor of the region.” Speransky himself, in turn, assessed this region in a letter to his daughter: “the people here, generally speaking, are kind, the climate is wonderful, the land is blessed... I will say in general: if the Lord brings you and me to live here, then we will live here more peacefully and pleasantly, than anywhere else we have ever lived before...”
Siberian Governor General
However, in March 1819, Speransky unexpectedly received a new appointment - Governor-General of Siberia. Speransky extremely quickly delved into local problems and circumstances with the help of the “glasnost” he proclaimed. Direct appeal to the highest authorities no longer “constitutes a crime.” In order to somehow improve the situation, Speransky begins to carry out reforms in the administration of the region. The “first collaborator” in carrying out the Siberian reforms was the future Decembrist G. S. Batenkov. He, together with Speransky, energetically worked on the development of the “Siberian Code” - an extensive set of reforms of the administrative apparatus of Siberia. Special meaning among them there were two projects approved by the emperor: “Institutions for the management of the Siberian provinces” and “Charter on the management of foreigners”. A special feature was the new division proposed by Speransky of the indigenous population of Siberia according to their way of life into sedentary, nomadic and wandering.
During the period of his work, Batenkov sincerely believed that Speransky, “a good and strong nobleman,” would truly transform Siberia. Subsequently, it became clear to him that Speransky was not given “any means to carry out the assigned assignment.” However, Batenkov believed that “Speransky cannot be personally blamed for failure.” At the end of January 1820, Speransky sent a brief report on his activities to Emperor Alexander, where he stated that he could finish all his work by May, after which his stay in Siberia “would have no purpose.” The Emperor ordered his former Secretary of State to arrange the route from Siberia in such a way as to arrive in the capital by the end of March next year. This delay greatly affected Speransky. A feeling of the meaninglessness of his own activities began to prevail in his soul. However, Speransky did not remain in despair for long and in March 1821 he returned to the capital.
Back in the capital
He returned to St. Petersburg on March 22, the emperor was in Laibach at that time. Returning on May 26, he received the former Secretary of State only weeks later - on June 23. When Mikhail entered the office, Alexander exclaimed: “Ugh, how hot it is here,” and took him with him to the balcony, into the garden. Any passer-by was able not only to see them, but also to completely hear their conversation, but this was visible and the sovereign wanted, so as to have a reason not to be frank. Speransky realized that he had ceased to enjoy his former influence at court.
Under Nicholas I
“Emperor Nicholas I rewards Speransky for drawing up a code of laws.” Painting by A. Kivshenko
Political views and reforms
A supporter of the constitutional system, Speransky was convinced that the government must grant new rights to society. A society divided into classes, the rights and obligations of which are established by law, needs civil and criminal law, public conduct 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, and that transformations needed to begin with the reorganization of the state apparatus.
The period 1808-1811 was the era of the highest importance 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), reform Senate (1811-1812). The young reformer, with his characteristic ardor, set about drawing up a complete plan for a new education government controlled in all its parts: from the sovereign’s office to the volost government. Already on December 11, 1808, he read to Alexander I his note “On the improvement of general public education.” Not later than October 1809, the entire plan was already on the emperor’s desk. October and November were spent in almost daily examination of its various parts, in which Alexander I made his amendments and additions.
The views of the new reformer M. M. Speransky are most fully reflected in the note of 1809 - “Introduction to the Code state laws" Speransky’s “Code” opens with a serious theoretical study of “the properties and objects of state, indigenous and organic laws.” He further explained and substantiated his thoughts on the basis of legal theory or, rather, legal philosophy. The reformer attached great importance the regulatory role of the state in the development of domestic industry and through its political transformations strengthened the autocracy in every possible way. Speransky writes: “If it were right state power were unlimited, if the forces of the state were united in sovereign power and they did 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 all 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, softer one, also excludes subjects from participation in government, but leaves them freedom in relation to their own personality and property. Consequently, subjects do not have political rights, but they retain civil rights. And their presence means that there is freedom to some extent in the state. But it is not sufficiently guaranteed, therefore, Speransky explains, it is necessary to protect it through the creation and strengthening of the basic law, that is, the Political Constitution.
Civil rights should be enumerated in it "in the form of the original civil consequences arising from political rights," and citizens should be given political rights with the help of which they will be able to defend their rights and their civil freedom. So, according to Speransky, civil rights and freedoms are not sufficiently ensured by laws and law. Without constitutional guarantees, they are powerless in themselves, therefore it was the requirement to strengthen the civil system that formed the basis of Speransky’s entire plan of state reforms and determined their main idea - “the government, hitherto autocratic, should be established and established by law.” The idea is that state power must be built on a permanent basis, and the government must stand on a solid constitutional and legal basis. This idea stems from the tendency to find in the fundamental laws of the state a solid foundation for civil rights and liberties. It carries the desire to ensure the connection of the civil system with basic laws and to firmly establish it, precisely based on these laws. The transformation plan involved a change in the social structure and a change public order. Speransky divides society on the basis of differences in rights. “From a review of civil and political rights, it is revealed that all of them can be divided into three classes: General civil rights, for all subjects of the Nobility; People of average wealth; Working people." The entire population was presented as civilly free, and serfdom abolished, although, while establishing “civil freedom for landowner peasants,” Speransky at the same time continued to call them “serfs.” 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 be implemented. Back in the spring of 1809, the emperor approved the “Regulations on the composition and management of the commission for drafting laws” developed by Speransky, where for many years (until the new reign) the main directions of its activities were determined: “The proceedings of the Commission have the following main subjects:
1. Civil Code. 2. Criminal Code. 3. Commercial Code. 4. Various parts belonging to State Economy and public law. 5. Code of provincial laws for the Baltic provinces. 6. Code of laws for the annexed Little Russian and Polish provinces.
Speransky speaks of the need to create a rule of law state, which ultimately must be a constitutional state. He explains that the security of 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 freedoms and material freedoms. Contents of personal freedoms:
1. No one can be punished without trial; 2. No one is obliged to provide personal service except by law. Contents of material freedoms: 1. Anyone can dispose of their property at will, in accordance with the general law; 2. No one is obliged to pay taxes and duties except by law, and not by arbitrariness. 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 legal limitation of power so that it takes into account existing law. This would give her more stability.
Speransky considers it necessary to have a system of separation of powers. Here he fully accepts the ideas that were then dominant in Western Europe, and writes in his work that: “It is impossible to base government on the law if one sovereign power draws up the law and executes 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 attract the population (personally free, including state peasants, subject to property qualifications) to direct participation in legislative, executive and judicial power on the basis of a system of four-stage elections (volost - district - provincial - State Duma). If this plan had been realized in reality, 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 interested he is 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 division of power. At the same time, Speransky recommends broad decentralization, that is, along with the central State Duma, local dumas should also be created: volost, district and provincial. The Duma is called upon to resolve issues of a local nature. Without the consent of the State Duma, the autocrat did not have the right to issue laws, except in cases when it came to saving the fatherland. However, as a counterbalance, the emperor could always dissolve the deputies and call new elections. Consequently, the State Duma, by its existence, was supposed to give only an idea of the needs of the people and exercise control over the executive power. The executive power is represented by boards, and on top level- ministries that were formed by the emperor himself. Moreover, ministers had to be responsible to the State Duma, which was given the right to ask for the repeal of illegal acts. This is what is fundamental 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, district and provincial courts, consisting of elected judges and acting with the participation of juries. The highest court was the Senate, whose members were elected for life by the State Duma and approved personally 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 that would not be obscured 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 engaged in developing questions about 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 on the creation of the State Council, replacing the Permanent Council. M. M. Speransky received the position of Secretary of State in this body. He was in charge of all the documentation passing through the State Council. Speransky initially envisaged in his reform plan the State Council as an institution that should not be particularly involved in the preparation and development of bills. But since the creation of the State Council was considered as the first stage of reforms 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 pass through the State Council. The general meeting was composed 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 tsar could only approve the opinion of the majority of the general meeting. The first chairman of the State Council (until August 14, 1814) was Chancellor Count Nikolai Petrovich Rumyantsev (1751_1826). The Secretary of State (new position) became the head of the State Chancellery.
Speransky not only developed, but also laid down a certain system of checks and balances in the activities of the highest state bodies under the supremacy of the emperor’s power. He argued that on the basis of this the very direction of reform is set. So, Speransky considered Russia to be mature enough to begin reforms and obtain a constitution that would provide not only civil but also political freedom. In a memo to Alexander I, he hopes that “if God blesses all undertakings, then by 1811... Russia will take on a new existence and be completely transformed in all parts.” Speransky argues that there are no examples in history of an enlightened commercial people remaining in a state of slavery for a long time and that upheavals cannot be avoided if the state structure does not correspond to the spirit of the times. Therefore, heads of state must carefully observe the development of the public spirit and adapt to it political systems. From this, Speransky concluded that it would be a great advantage for a constitution to emerge 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 points of Speransky’s program. Alexander I was quite satisfied with only partial transformations of feudal Russia, flavored with liberal promises and abstract discussions about law and freedom. Alexander I was ready to accept all this. But at the same time, he also experienced strong pressure from the court environment, including members of his family, who sought to prevent radical changes 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 procedure for obtaining titles and certain privileges. From now on, these ranks were to be considered as simple insignia. Only those who performed public service received privileges. The decree reforming the procedure for obtaining court ranks was signed by the emperor, but it was no secret to anyone who its actual author was. For many decades, the offspring of the most noble families (literally from the cradle) received the court ranks of chamber cadet (accordingly, 5th class), and after some time - chamberlain (4th class). When they entered civil or military service upon reaching a certain age, they, having never served anywhere, automatically occupied the “highest places.” By Speransky's decree, chamber cadets and chamberlains not in active service were ordered to find a type of activity within two months (otherwise - resignation).
The second measure was a decree published on August 6, 1809 on new rules for promotion to civil service ranks, secretly prepared by Speransky. The note to the sovereign, under a very unassuming title, contained a revolutionary plan for a radical change in the procedure for promotion to ranks, establishing a direct connection between obtaining a rank and the educational qualifications. This was a bold attempt on the system of rank production, which had been in force since the era of Peter I. One can only imagine how many ill-wishers and enemies Mikhail Mikhailovich acquired thanks to this one decree. Speransky protests against the monstrous injustice when a graduate of the law faculty receives ranks later than a colleague who has never really studied anywhere. From now on, the rank of collegiate assessor, which previously could be obtained based on length of service, was given only to those officials who had a certificate of successful completion course of study at one of the Russian universities or having passed exams under a special program. At the end of the note, Speransky directly speaks about the harmfulness existing system 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 having a university diploma. This program provided for testing 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 collegiate assessor corresponded to the 8th grade of the “Table of Ranks”. From this class onwards, officials had great privileges and high salaries. It’s easy to guess that there were many people who wanted to get it, and most of the applicants, usually middle-aged ones, were simply not able to pass the exams. Hatred towards the new reformer began to increase. The emperor, having protected his faithful comrade with his aegis, raised him up the career ladder.
Elements of market relations in the Russian economy were also covered in the projects of M. M. Speransky. He shared the ideas of economist Adam Smith. Speransky connected the future economic development with the development of commerce, transformation of the financial system and monetary circulation. In the first months of 1810, a discussion took place on the problem of regulating public finances. Speransky drew up the “Financial Plan,” which formed the basis of the Tsar’s manifesto of February 2. The main goal of this document was to eliminate the budget deficit. According to its contents, production was discontinued paper money, the volume of financial resources was reduced, the financial activities of ministers were brought under control. In order to replenish the state treasury, the per capita tax was increased from 1 ruble to 3, and a new, unprecedented tax was also 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 over two years.
In the summer of 1810, on the initiative of Speransky, the reorganization of ministries began, which was completed by June 1811. During this time, the Ministry of Commerce was liquidated, matters of internal security were separated, for which a special Ministry of Police was formed. The ministries themselves were divided into departments (headed by a director), and departments into branches. A council of ministers was formed from the highest officials of the ministry, and a committee of ministers from all ministers to discuss matters of an administrative and executive nature.
Clouds begin to gather over the reformer's head. Speransky, despite the instinct of self-preservation, continues to work selflessly. In a report presented to the emperor on February 11, 1811, Speransky reports: “/…/ the following main items have been completed: I. The State Council has been established. II. Two parts of the civil code have been completed. III. A new division of ministries was made, a general charter was drawn up for them, and draft charters for private ones were drawn up. IV. A permanent system for the payment of public debts was drawn up and adopted: 1) cessation of the issue of banknotes; 2) sale of property; 3) establishing a repayment commission. V. A coin system has been compiled. VI. A commercial code for 1811 was drawn up.
Never, perhaps, have so many general state regulations been made in Russia in one year as in the past. /…/ From this it follows that in order to successfully complete the plan that Your Majesty deigns to delineate for yourself, it is necessary to strengthen the methods of its implementation. /…/ the following subjects in terms of this seem absolutely necessary: I. Complete the civil code. II. Draw up two very necessary codes: 1) judicial, 2) criminal. III. Complete the structure of the judicial senate. IV. Draw up a structure for the governing Senate. V. Administration of provinces in judicial and executive order. VI. Consider and strengthen ways to pay off debts. VII. To establish state annual revenues: 1) By introducing a new census of people. 2) Formation of land tax. 3) A new device for wine income. 4) The best device income from government property. /…/ It can be said with certainty that /…/ by completing them /…/ the empire will be placed in a position so solid and reliable that Your Majesty’s century will always be called a blessed century.” Alas, the grandiose plans for the future outlined in the second part of the report remained unfulfilled (primarily Senate reform).
By the beginning of 1811, Speransky proposed and new project transformation of the Senate. The essence of the project was significantly different from the original 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 was from the crown, the other was chosen by the nobility. Due to various internal and external reasons The Senate remained in the same state, and Speransky himself ultimately came to the conclusion that the project should be postponed. Let us also note that in 1810, according to Speransky’s plan, the Tsarskoye Selo Lyceum was established.
This was, in general terms, the political reform. Serfdom, the court, administration, legislation - everything found a place and resolution in this grandiose work, which remained a monument to political talents far beyond the level of even highly talented people. Some blame Speransky for not paying enough attention peasant reform. In Speransky we read: “The relationships in which both of 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 it; the interest of the peasantry is that the nobles should also be subordinate to the crown... The throne is always serfdom as the only counterbalance to the property of their masters,” that is, serfdom was incompatible with political freedom. “Thus, Russia, divided into various classes, exhausts its strength in the struggle that these classes wage among themselves, and leaves the government with the entire volume of unlimited power. A state structured in this way - that is, on the division of hostile classes - even if it has one or another external structure - these and other letters to the nobility, letters to cities, two senates and the same number of parliaments - is a despotic state, and as long as it remains consist of the same elements (warring classes), it will be impossible for it to be a monarchical state.” Consciousness of the need, in the interests of the political reform itself, to abolish serfdom, as well as the consciousness of the need for the redistribution of power to correspond to the redistribution political force, is clear from the reasoning.
Code of laws
Emperor Nicholas I first decided to create a strong legislative system. The architect of this system was Speransky. It was his experience and talent that the new emperor wanted to use, entrusting him with the compilation of the “Code of Laws of the Russian Empire”. Speransky headed the 2nd department of His Imperial Majesty's Own Chancellery. Under the leadership of Mikhail Mikhailovich, by 1830, the “Complete Collection of Laws of the Russian Empire” was compiled in 45 volumes, which included laws starting from the “Code” of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich (1649) until the end of the reign of Alexander I. Back in 1832, the 15-volume “Code of Laws” was produced. As a reward for this, Speransky received the Order of St. Andrew the First-Called. At a special meeting of the State Council in January 1833, dedicated to the publication of the first edition of the Code of Laws of the Russian Empire, Emperor Nicholas I, taking off the St. Andrew's Star, put it on Speransky.
Loading...