The system of public administration and management reforms of Catherine II. The formation of the Soviet management system

Are you here: What to make from drywall

Measures were taken to strengthen the nobility in the center and locally. For the first time in Russian legislation, a document appeared that determined the activities of local authorities government controlled and courts. This system of local authorities lasted until the Great Reforms of the 60s of the XIX century. Introduced by Catherine II Administrative division the country remained until 1917.

On November 7, 1775, the “Institution for the management of the provinces of the All-Russian Empire” was adopted. The country was divided into provinces, each of which was supposed to have a population of 300-400 thousand male souls. By the end of Catherine's reign, there were 50 provinces in Russia. At the head of the provinces were governors who reported directly to the empress, and their power was significantly expanded. The capitals and several other provinces were subordinate to governors general.

Under the governor, a provincial government was created, and the provincial prosecutor was subordinate to him. Finances in the province were handled by the Treasury Chamber, headed by the vice-governor. The provincial land surveyor was engaged in land management. Schools, hospitals, almshouses were in charge of the Order of Public Charity (look after - look after, patronize, take care of); were first created government agencies with social functions.

The provinces were divided into districts of 20-30 thousand male souls in each. Since there were clearly not enough city centers for counties, Catherine II renamed many large rural settlements into cities, making them administrative centers. The main authority of the county became the Lower Zemstvo Court, headed by a police captain elected by the local nobility. A district treasurer and a district surveyor were appointed to the districts, following the model of the provinces.

Using the theory of separation of powers and improving the management system, Catherine II separated the judiciary from the executive. All classes, except for the serfs (for them the landowner was the owner and judge), had to take part in local government. Each class received its own court. The landowner was judged by the Upper Zemstvo Court in the provinces and the district court in the counties. State peasants were judged by the Upper Judgment in the province and the Lower Jurisprudence in the district, the townspeople were judged by the city magistrate in the district and the provincial magistrate in the province. All these courts were elected, with the exception of the lower courts, which were appointed by the governor. The highest judicial body in the country became the Senate, and in the provinces - the chambers of criminal and civil courts, the members of which were appointed by the state. New for Russia was the Conscientious Court, designed to stop strife and reconcile those who were quarreling. He was classless. The separation of powers was not complete, since the governor could interfere in court affairs.

In a separate administrative unit the city was allocated. At its head was the mayor, endowed with all rights and powers. Strict police control was introduced in cities. The city was divided into parts (districts), which were under the supervision of a private bailiff, and the parts, in turn, were divided into quarters, which were controlled by a quarterly overseer.

After the provincial reform, all boards ceased to function, with the exception of the Foreign, Military and Admiralty boards. The functions of the boards were transferred to provincial bodies. In 1775, the Zaporozhye Sich was liquidated, and most of the Cossacks were resettled to Kuban.

The existing system of managing the territory of the country in the new conditions solved the problem of strengthening the power of the nobility locally, its goal was to prevent new popular uprisings. The fear of the rebels was so great that Catherine II ordered the Yaik River to be renamed the Ural, and the Yaik Cossacks to be renamed the Ural. The number of local officials has more than doubled.

Letters granted to the nobility and cities

On April 21, 1785, on the birthday of Catherine II, Letters of Grant to the nobility and cities were simultaneously issued. It is known that Catherine II also prepared a draft Charter for state (state) peasants, but it was not published due to fears of noble discontent.

By issuing two charters, Catherine II regulated the legislation on the rights and responsibilities of the estates. In accordance with the “Charter on the rights, liberties and advantages of the noble Russian nobility”, they were exempted from compulsory service, personal taxes, and corporal punishment. The estates were declared the full property of the landowners, who, in addition, had the right to establish their own factories and factories. Nobles could only sue their peers and, without a noble court, could not be deprived of noble honor, life and property. The nobles of the province and district constituted the provincial and district corporations of the nobility, respectively, and elected their leaders, as well as local government officials. Provincial and district noble assemblies had the right to make representations to the government about their needs. The charter granted to the nobility consolidated and legally formalized the power of the nobility in Russia. The ruling class was given the name “noble”. The “Certificate of Rights and Benefits to the Cities of the Russian Empire” determined the rights and responsibilities of the urban population and the management system in cities. All townspeople were registered in the City Book of Philistines and formed a “city society.” It was announced that “the townspeople or real city dwellers are those who have a house or other building, or place, or land in that city.” Urban population divided into six categories. The first of them included the nobles and clergy living in the city; the second included merchants, divided into three guilds; in the third - guild artisans; the fourth category consisted of foreigners permanently living in the city; fifth - eminent townspeople, who included people with higher education and capitalists. The sixth are the townspeople who lived by crafts or work. Residents of the city elected a self-government body every three years - the General city council, city mayor and judges. The general city duma elected an executive body - a six-vote duma, which included one representative from each category of the city population. The City Duma decided on matters related to improvement, public education, compliance with trade rules, etc. only with the knowledge of the mayor appointed by the government.

The charter placed all six categories of the urban population under state control. Real power in the city was in the hands of the mayor, the deanery and the governor.

Education reform

Catherine II gave great value education in the life of the country. In the 60-70s of the 18th century. she, together with the President of the Academy of Arts and the Director of the Land Noble Corps I. I. Betsky, made an attempt to create a system of closed estates educational institutions. Their structure was based on the idea of the priority of upbringing over education. Believing that “the root of all evil and good is education,” Catherine II and I. I. Betskoy decided to create a “new breed of people.” According to the plan of I. I. Betsky, Orphanages, the Smolny Institute of Noble Maidens with a department for bourgeois girls in St. Petersburg, a Commercial School in Moscow were opened in Moscow and St. Petersburg, and the Cadet Corps was transformed.

The views of I. I. Betsky were progressive for their time, providing for the humane upbringing of children, the development of their natural talents, the prohibition of corporal punishment, and the organization of women's education. However, “greenhouse” conditions, isolation from real life, from the influence of family and society, of course, made I. I. Betsky’s attempts to form a “new man” utopian.

The general line of development of Russian education did not go through the utopian ideas of I. And Betsky, but along the path of creating a system secondary school. It began with the school reform of 1782-1786. The Serbian teacher F.I. Jankovic de Mirievo played a major role in carrying out this reform. Two-year small public schools were established in district towns, and four-year main public schools in provincial towns. In the newly created schools, uniform start and end dates for classes were introduced, a class lesson system was introduced, and methods of teaching disciplines and educational literature, unified curricula.

New schools, together with closed gentry buildings, noble boarding schools and gymnasiums at Moscow University, formed the structure of secondary education in Russia. According to experts, by the end of the century in Russia there were 550 educational institutions with a total number of 60-70 thousand students, not counting home education. Education, like all other spheres of the country's life, was fundamentally class-based.

A. N. Radishchev

The Peasant War, the ideas of Russian and French enlighteners, the Great French Revolution and the War of Independence in North America (1775-1783), which led to the formation of the United States, the emergence of Russian anti-serfdom thought in the person of N. I. Novikov, and the leading deputies of the Statutory Commission influenced the formation views of Alexander Nikolaevich Radishchev (1749-1802). In “Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow,” in the ode “Liberty,” in “Conversation about the Son of the Fatherland,” A. N. Radishchev called for the “complete abolition of slavery” and the transfer of land to the peasants. He believed that “autocracy is the state most contrary to human nature,” and insisted on its revolutionary overthrow. A. N. Radishchev called the one who fights for the interests of the people, “for freedom - a priceless gift, the source of all great deeds,” a true patriot, a true son of the Fatherland. For the first time in Russia there was a call for a revolutionary overthrow of autocracy and serfdom.

“A rebel is worse than Pugachev,” this is how Catherine II assessed the first Russian revolutionary. By her order, the circulation of the book “Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow” was confiscated, and its author was arrested and sentenced to death penalty, replaced by a ten-year exile in the Ilimsk prison in Siberia.

Paul I

The reign of Paul I (1796-1801) is called “unenlightened absolutism” by some historians, “military-police dictatorship” by others, still others consider Paul “the Russian Hamlet”, and others call him a “romantic emperor”. However, even those historians who find positive features in Paul’s reign admit that he equated autocracy with personal despotism.

Paul I ascended the throne after the death of his mother at the age of 42, already a mature, established man. Catherine II, having given her son Gatchina near St. Petersburg, removed him from the court. In Gatchina, Paul introduced strict rules based on iron discipline and asceticism, contrasting them with the luxury and wealth of the St. Petersburg court. Having become emperor, he tried to strengthen the regime by strengthening discipline and power in order to exclude all manifestations of liberalism and freethinking in Russia. Pavel's characteristic features were harshness, instability and temper. He believed that everything in the country should be subordinated established by the king orders, he put diligence and accuracy in the first place, did not tolerate objections, sometimes reaching the point of tyranny.

In 1797, Paul issued the “Institution on the Imperial Family,” which canceled Peter’s decree on succession to the throne. From now on, the throne was to pass strictly through the male line from father to son, and in the absence of sons, to the eldest of the brothers. To maintain the imperial house, a department of “destinations” was formed, which managed the lands that belonged to the imperial family and the peasants who lived on them. The procedure for the service of nobles was tightened, and the effect of the Letter of Grant to the nobility was limited. Prussian order was imposed in the army.

In 1797, the Manifesto on the three-day corvee was published. He forbade landowners from using peasants for field work on Sundays, recommending that corvée be limited to three days a week.

Paul I took the Order of Malta under his protection, and when Napoleon captured Malta in 1798, he declared war on France in an alliance with England and Austria. When England occupied Malta, winning it from the French, there followed a severance of relations with England and an alliance with France. By agreement with Napoleon, Paul sent 40 regiments of Don Cossacks to conquer India to annoy the British.

Paul's continued stay in power was fraught with loss of political stability for the country. The emperor’s foreign policy also did not meet the interests of Russia. On March 12, 1801, with the participation of the heir to the throne, the future Emperor Alexander I, the last palace coup in the history of Russia was carried out. Paul I was killed in the Mikhailovsky Castle in St. Petersburg.

Similarly, students consider the reform of local government of the country carried out by Catherine II and compare it with the reform carried out by Peter I.

4. Next, the teacher organizes work with fragments of the Charters of Catherine II. Answering questions about documents, students note changes in the position of classes in the second half of the 18th century.
Formulating the conclusion of the lesson, students can note that thanks to the activities of Catherine II, the country relatively safely passed the turn of the 18th-19th centuries. However, the potential of the traditional system was exhausted, and its continued existence led to an ever greater lag behind Western Europe.
Homework:§ 47, answer the questions after the paragraph; draw up comparative characteristics personalities of Catherine II and Peter I.

Lessons 57-58.

FOREIGN POLICY OF RUSSIA IN THE SECOND HALF of the 18th century. GREAT COMMANDERS AND NAVAL LEADERS

Lesson objectives: characteristics of goals, directions and results foreign policy Russia during the reign of Catherine II; acquaintance with the life and activities of the great commanders and naval commanders of Russia during the period under study.

Key dates and events
1768 -1774 - Russian-Turkish war.
1770 - defeat of the Turkish fleet in Chesme Bay.
1772 - the first section of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.
1774 - Kuchuk-Kainardzhi peace treaty between Russia and Turkey.
1787 -1791 - Russian-Turkish war.
1791 - Iasi Peace Treaty between Russia and Turkey.
1788 -1790 - Russian-Swedish war.
1790 - Verel Peace Treaty between Russia and Sweden.
1793 - the second section of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.
1795 - the third section of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.
1795 - Russia, England and Austria formed an alliance against France.

Lesson terms and concepts
Bar Confederation - in 1768-1772 armed alliance of the Polish gentry against King Stanislaw Poniatowski and Russia.
Kuchuk-Kainardzhi world - concluded on July 21, 1774 in the village of Kuchuk-Kainardzha on the Danube River, ended the Russian-Turkish war of 1768-1774. Ottoman Empire recognized: the independence of the Crimean Khanate, the right of Russian merchant ships to sail freely in the Black Sea and pass through the Black Sea straits, the annexation of Azov, Kerch and other territories to Russia, the Russian protectorate over Moldova and Wallachia.
Sections of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth - divisions of the Polish state between Russia, Prussia and Austria in 1772, 1793 and 1795.
Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth - the traditional name of the Polish state from the end of the 16th century, which was a class monarchy headed by a king elected by the Sejm. From the moment of the conclusion of the Union of Lublin in 1569 and until 1795, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was the official name of the united Polish-Lithuanian state.
Iasi world - a peace treaty between Russia and Turkey, ended the Russian-Turkish war of 1787-1791. Concluded on January 9, 1792 in Iasi. Confirmed the annexation of Crimea and Kuban to Russia and established the Russian-Turkish border along the Dniester.
Personalities: M. I. Kutuzov, A. G. Orlov, P. A. Rumyantsev-Zadunaisky, G. A. Spiridov, A. V. Suvorov, F. F. Ushakov.
Lesson equipment: map “Russia in the second half of the 18th century”; CD “Encyclopedia of Russian History. 862-1917"; CD “History of Russia and its closest neighbors: Encyclopedia for children”; CD “Science of Victory”, “History of Military Art” (“New Disc”); fragments of the films “Admiral Ushakov”, “Ships Storm the Bastions” (directed by M. I. Romm), “Suvorov” (directed by V. I. Pudovkin).
Plan for learning new material: 1. The nature of Russian foreign policy under Catherine II. 2. Main directions and results of foreign policy. 3. Great military leaders.
1. In the introductory speech, the teacher asks students to remember what foreign policy goals and objectives faced Russia in the first half of the 18th century, which were achieved by the time of the accession of Catherine II. During the conversation, students highlight two important foreign policy goals that Catherine II faced:
1) access to the Black Sea (solution to the Crimean problem);
2) completion of the process of reunification of Russia with Ukraine and Belarus.
An indicator of Russia's increasing influence on European affairs was the Seven Years' War. In foreign policy of the second half of the 18th century. the line was pursued to establish Russia as a great European power. There was a move beyond Europeanism (intervention in crisis situations not directly related to the interests of Russia), and a tendency towards globalization of foreign policy was formed (diplomatic support for the North American colonies during the War of Independence, sending Cossacks to search for routes to India).
2. Schoolchildren study the main directions and results of Russian foreign policy under Catherine II on their own and record the results in a table.

After the death of Elizaveta Petrovna in December 1761, Peter III (1728-1762), the son of the daughter of Peter I - Anna Petrovna and the German Duke, became emperor, a mentally undeveloped man with little education.

called, cruel, alien to everything Russian, overly interested in military affairs.

During his short reign, the most important was the decree “On the freedom of the nobility” of February 18, 1762, which abolished compulsory service for the nobles. In addition, the Secret Chancellery, which was in charge of political crimes and instilled fear in the population, was abolished. However, these measures could not bring Peter III popularity among his subjects. General discontent was caused by peace with Prussia, which meant the renunciation of all Russian conquests in the Seven Years' War; preparation for war with Denmark in the interests of Holstein, enormous Prussian and Holstein influence at the Russian court; disrespect for Orthodox customs; introduction of German orders in the army, disdain for the Russian guard.

The ascension of Catherine II to the Russian throne In such a situation, a significant part of the Russian nobility pinned their hopes on their wife Peter III, the future Empress Catherine II (1762-1796), who, although she was German by birth, understood perfectly well that the Russian Empress should think first of all about the interests of Russia. Unlike her husband, who continued to consider himself the Duke of Holstein, Catherine, after the death of her parents, renounced all rights to Anhalt-Zerbst.

The future Russian empress was born in 1729, she was the daughter of the Prince of Anhalt-Zerbst, a general of the Prussian army. The princess received a good education at home, and during her childhood and adolescence she traveled quite a lot with her family, which helped her broaden her horizons. In 1745, Sophia Augusta Frederica, having converted to Orthodoxy and the name Ekaterina Alekseevna, married the heir to the Russian throne - Peter Fedorovich (before baptism Karl Peter Ulrich), the son of the elder sister of Empress Elizabeth - Anna Petrovna, who married the Holstein Duke Karl Friedrich.

Finding herself in Russia at the age of 16, Ekaterina, having realistically assessed the situation, decided to become “one of her own”, Russian, as quickly as possible - to master the language perfectly, assimilate Russian customs - and she spared no effort to achieve her goal. She read a lot and educated herself. Catherine showed particular interest in descriptions of travel, works of classics, history, philosophy, and the works of French encyclopedists.

By nature, Catherine had a sober mind, observation, the ability to suppress her emotions, listen carefully to her interlocutor, and be pleasant in communication. These qualities were very useful to her in the first years of her stay in Russia, since relations with her husband and, most importantly, with Empress Elizaveta Petrovna were quite difficult.

Great ambition, willpower, and efficiency helped Catherine eventually achieve power. A group of conspirators, mostly guards officers, rallied around the future Catherine II. Particularly active were Catherine's favorite - Grigory Orlov (1734-1783) and his brother Alexei (1737-1808). On the night of June 28, 1762, Catherine, together with Alexei Orlov, arrived from Peterhof to St. Petersburg, where on the same day the Senate proclaimed her empress and declared Peter III deposed. On June 29, he was taken into custody, and in July he was killed under unclear circumstances. In September 1762, Catherine II was crowned in Moscow.

Enlightened absolutism of Catherine II The empress devoted the first years of her reign to strengthening her power, selecting trusted persons, studying the state of affairs in the state, as well as becoming more thoroughly acquainted with Russia (in 1763-1767 she made three trips to the European part of the country). At this time, a policy of enlightened absolutism began to be pursued in Russia. Considering herself a student of French philosophers of the 18th century, Catherine II sought, with the help of some transformations, to eliminate elements of “barbarism” from the life of the country, to make Russian society more “enlightened”, closer to Western European, but at the same time to preserve intact the autocracy and its social base - the nobility .

The need for change was largely determined by the socio-economic situation that had developed at the beginning of the reign of Catherine II. Throughout the 16th century. In Russia, elements of capitalist relations developed, the ideas of entrepreneurship gradually penetrated into various layers of society - the nobility, merchants, and peasants. The internal situation of the country in the early 60s of the 18th century was particularly difficult. gave rise to the peasant movement, in which factory and monastery peasants most actively participated. All this, along with the ideas of the Enlightenment, determined the domestic policy of Russia, especially in the first two decades of the reign of Catherine II.

In the 60-70s, it was forbidden to buy peasants for industrial enterprises, freedom to organize industrial business was declared, all kinds of monopolies were abolished, as well as internal customs duties, which contributed to the inclusion in internal trade of new lands annexed to the Russian state during the reign of Catherine II: some regions of Ukraine, Belarus, the Baltic states, the Black Sea, Azov, Kuban steppes, Crimea.

Under Catherine II, considerable attention was paid to the development of the education system: educational homes, institutes for girls, and cadet corps were created. In the 80s When organizing provincial and district public schools, the principle of classless education was proclaimed.

EMPRESS CATHERINE II THE GREAT After the death of Peter III, Catherine became empress. She glorified her name with loud conquests and wise government orders. To draw up new laws, she herself wrote an “Order” under the title “Order of the Commission on the Drawing Up of a Draft New Code.” Under her, the Russian Academy was established in 1783 and in the same year the Crimea was annexed to Russia. The administration of Crimea was entrusted to Potemkin.

From 1787-1791 The Second Turkish War, which ended in peace in Iasi (in 1791). The main hero of this war was Suvorov, who won victories over the Turks at Kinburn and in 1789 at Focsani and Rymnik. According to this world, Turkey forever abandoned Crimea and ceded to Russia the lands between the Bug and the Dniester with the city of Ochakov (Illustrated Chronology... P. 116).

Strengthening serfdom However, along with such progressive measures that objectively contributed to the development of bourgeois relations, serfdom was strengthening in Russia. Already in the manifesto of July 6, 1762, which explained the reasons for the coup, one of the main goals was defined domestic policy Catherine II - to support the landowners in every possible way and keep the peasants in obedience. In the 60s, when the empress still verbally supported the idea of emancipating the peasants, serfs were forbidden to complain about the master, and landowners were allowed to send their peasants to hard labor. In order to destroy explosive hotbeds in the south, self-government was eliminated and the Cossack districts were reorganized - here at the end of the 18th century. Serfdom was widespread. Subsequently, during the reign of Catherine II, there was an increase in the exploitation of peasants: serfs made up about 50% of their total number, more than half of them were in corvee labor, which in the country as a whole by the 80s. increased to five days a week instead of three days in the 60s; especially widely in the second half of the 18th century. Trade in serfs spread. The situation of state peasants also worsened - the duties imposed on them were increased, and their distribution to landowners was actively carried out.

However, trying to maintain her reputation as an “enlightened monarch,” Catherine II could not allow complete transformation serfs into slaves: they continued to be considered a tax-paying class, could go to court and be witnesses in it, could, albeit with the consent of the landowner, enroll as merchants, engage in tax farming, etc.

Departure from the policy of enlightened absolutism last years his rule under the influence peasant war under the leadership of E. Pugachev (1773-1775), and especially the Great french revolution(1789-1794), Catherine II gradually moved away from enlightened absolutism. This mainly concerns the ideological sphere - there is a pursuit of advanced ideas that can lead to a change in the existing order, which the empress seeks to avoid at all costs. In particular, A.N. Radishchev, the author of the anti-serfdom “Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow,” was called by Catherine a rebel worse than Pugachev and in 1790 was exiled to Siberia; the most famous Russian educator, publisher

N.I. Novikov, in 1792 was imprisoned in the Shlisselburg fortress. However, the foundations of social life, laid by the policy of enlightened absolutism, remain virtually unchanged until the death of Catherine II.

Central government apparatus One of the characteristic, essential features of the policy of enlightened absolutism of Catherine II was the streamlining of the system of public administration. The idea of the need for this was already expressed in the manifesto of July 6, 1762, its implementation began with the transformation of the Senate.

Immediately after the accession of Catherine II to the throne, participant in the coup N.I. Panin (1718-1783), a famous diplomat, adviser to the College of Foreign Affairs, presented the empress with a draft of changes in the central administration. He proposed creating a permanent imperial council consisting of four secretaries (foreign and internal affairs, military and naval departments) and two advisers. All major issues were to be considered by the Council in the presence of the Empress, who made the final decisions. In addition, it was proposed to divide the Senate into six departments.

Project N.I. Panin, as limiting the autocratic power of the empress, was rejected by her, however, to speed up and streamline office work, the idea of dividing the Senate was put into practice in 1763. Six departments were created, four of which were located in St. Petersburg: the first dealt with the most important internal and political affairs , the second - judicial, the third was in charge of the affairs of the western outskirts of the state, communications, higher education, and the police; the fourth - military and naval affairs. The two Moscow departments corresponded to the first and second St. Petersburg departments.

Catherine II decided many important issues without the participation of the Senate. She maintained relations with him through Prosecutor General A.L. Vyazemsky (1727-1793), who received secret instructions to obstruct the legislative activities of the Senate. As a result, the importance of the Senate decreased; from the highest body of government, as it was under Elizaveta Petrovna, it turned into a central administrative and judicial institution. In the 70-80s of the 18th century. There was a further weakening of central government bodies. After the provincial reform of 1775, activities

The Senate is limited to judicial functions; the affairs of most collegiums are transferred to new provincial institutions.

By the 90s. Most of the colleges ceased to exist: in 1779 - the Manufacturer College (industry), in 1780 - the State Office College (public expenditures), in 1783 - the Berg College (mining industry), in 1784 - Chamber Collegium (state revenues), in 1786 - Justice Collegium (judicial) and Patrimonial Collegium (land ownership issues), in 1788 - Revision Collegium (control government spending). Only those boards were retained whose affairs could not be transferred to local government bodies: the Foreign, Military, Naval and Commerce boards.

Thus, during the reign of Catherine II the role central authorities was gradually reduced to general management and supervision, and basic management issues began to be resolved locally. However, even before reforming the local government system, the Empress made an attempt to give Russia new legislation that would meet the spirit of the times.

An attempt to create new legislation Starting with Peter I, all the rulers of Russia understood the need to create a new set of Russian laws. However, unlike her predecessors, Catherine II did not seek to systematize old laws, but to create new ones. Planning to assemble a “Commission for drawing up a new code” instead of the outdated Code of 1649, already in 1765 she began to draw up a special instruction for it - “Instruction”, which reflected the ideas of educational philosophy. Counting Russia European country, Catherine sought to give her the appropriate laws, and her main sources were the works “On the Spirit of Laws” by the famous French educator Charles Louis Montesquieu (1689-1755) and “On Crimes and Punishments” by Cesare Beccaria (1738-1794), an Italian educator and lawyer .

The “Nakaz” quite fully covers the most important issues of legislation: its tasks, features of government, legal proceedings, the punishment system, the position of classes, etc. The initial edition of the "Nakaz", shown to some of the empress's close associates, aroused many objections on their part as being too free-thinking and not in accordance with Russian customs. As a result, the “Nakaz” was significantly reduced, mainly due to liberal provisions, for example, articles on improving the situation of peasants, on the separation of legislative power from the judicial branch, etc. The articles relating to legal proceedings and education remained closest to educational ideology. In general, the “Order” was a statement of general principles that should guide the Statutory Commission in its work.

In December 1766, a manifesto was issued convening a “Commission for drawing up a new code.” Elected deputies from all classes were to be represented on the Commission.

A total of 564 deputies were elected: 161 - from nobles, 208 - from cities, 167 - from rural population, 28 - from central institutions (Senate, Synod, collegiums and other public places). Each deputy received an order from his constituents that reflected their wishes. A total of 1,465 orders were submitted, most of them (1,066) from the rural population. During the work of the Statutory Commission, the deputies were paid a salary from the treasury: nobles - 400 rubles, townspeople - 120 rubles, peasants - 37 rubles. Deputies were forever freed from the death penalty, corporal punishment, and confiscation of property.

On July 30, 1767, the established commission began its work in Moscow. General A.I. was elected its chairman, on the recommendation of Catherine II. Bibikov (1729-1774), he had the right to schedule meetings, introduce and put proposals to a vote.

The paperwork in the Statutory Commission was quite complex: each issue went through different commissions (there were about 20 of them) several times, in addition, the areas of activity of the special commissions and general meeting the deputies were not sufficiently differentiated, which made their work difficult. The commission moved from one issue to another, without resolving the previous one; for a year and a half, the deputies could not even simply read all the orders.

In general, the activities of the Statutory Commission were doomed to failure from the very beginning due to the lack of preliminary preparation, as well as the enormous volume and complexity of the work: to create new laws, deputies needed to understand the old legislation, which included more than 10 thousand heterogeneous provisions, and study deputy orders , remove the contradictions, often irreconcilable, between the wishes of different classes and, finally, draw up a new legislative code, based on the principles set out in Catherine’s “Order”, which often contradict parliamentary orders. In December 1768, due to the outbreak of the Russian-Turkish War and the fact that a significant part of the noble deputies had to go to the troops, the Legislative Commission was dissolved for an indefinite period, but the deputies no longer met.

Despite the fact that the attempt to create new legislation ended in failure, the work of the Legislative Commission had a significant impact on the subsequent activities of Catherine II. The orders of the deputies showed the position of the various classes of Russian society, their wishes and largely determined the direction of further reforms.

Reform of local government The system of local government included the management of provinces and districts, as well as cities and individual estates. In November 1775, the “Institution for the management of provinces” was published Russian Empire" The introduction to this document pointed out the shortcomings that caused the need for reform: the vastness of the provinces, the insufficient number of governing bodies, the mixing of various matters in them.

As a result of the reform, the previous administrative division (province, province, district) was changed: the provinces were abolished, the number of provinces was increased to 40 (by the end of the reign of Catherine And due to the annexation of new territories to Russia, there were already 51 provinces). Previously, regional division was carried out randomly, and provinces with very different populations had approximately the same staff of officials. Now it was established that the provinces should be approximately the same in number of inhabitants - from 300 to 400 thousand people; for the county, the population was determined to be 20-30 thousand. Since the new administrative division was more fractional, about 200 large villages were transformed into county ones cities.

With the change in administrative boundaries as part of the provincial reform, local government was also changed: administrative, financial and judicial affairs were separated. Subsequently, the unification of local government bodies throughout the country led to the abolition of the autonomy of some outskirts: in Ukraine this finally happened in 1781, and since 1783 the national system administrative management was extended to the Baltic states.

Provincial Administration One or more provinces received the status of a governor-general and were subordinate to a governor-general appointed by the Senate, whose activities were directly controlled by the empress. The Governor-General had broad powers of supervision over all local government and courts in the territory entrusted to him.

The administration of a separate province was entrusted to a governor appointed by the Senate, who headed the provincial government - the main administrative body. In addition to the governor, it included two provincial councilors and a provincial prosecutor. The board dealt with various administrative issues, controlled the management of the province, and, together with the vice-governor, was in charge of all police agencies of the province and district.

The vice-governor (or lieutenant of the ruler, i.e. the governor) was appointed by the Senate, if necessary could replace the governor, and was also the chairman of the treasury chamber - the highest financial body of the province that managed state property. She was in charge of tax collection, government contracts and buildings, provincial and district treasuries, and economic peasants of former church estates.

In addition to administrative, financial and special judicial institutions, a new body was created in each provincial city - the order of public charity, which was in charge of schools, hospitals, almshouses and shelters. Unlike the provincial government and the treasury chamber, the order of public charity had an elected composition.

County government executive body there was a lower zemstvo court, headed by a police captain (as a rule, retired officers). He was considered the head of the district, was in charge of the district administration and police, monitored trade, conducted a preliminary investigation into court cases. He was elected by the nobles for a term of three years at a district assembly, and two assessors were also chosen from among the nobles to help him.

The head of administrative and police power in the district city was the mayor, appointed by the Senate.

Judicial system Since 1775, class-based legal proceedings were introduced in the provinces. The provincial court of justice for the nobles was the Supreme Zemsky Court, for the urban population - the provincial magistrate, for personally free peasants - the upper reprisal. These judicial bodies consisted of assessors - elected from the corresponding class, and were headed by specially appointed officials. At each upper zemstvo court, a noble guardianship was established, dealing with the affairs of widows and young orphans of nobles. In addition, special conscientious courts were established in provincial cities to deal with criminal cases related to the insanity of the criminal, and civil cases resolved through a settlement deal.

A chamber of civil court and a chamber of criminal court were established as the highest judicial authorities in all cases decided in the provincial class courts. In case of any complaints, they had the right to make the final decision.

In each district, for the nobles there was a district court, subordinate to the Supreme Zemstvo Court, for the urban population - a city magistrate, under the jurisdiction of the provincial magistrate. In the districts where over 10 thousand personally free peasants lived, there was a lower reprisal subordinate to the upper reprisal. In district judicial institutions, judges and assessors were elected from representatives of the class whose affairs they were in charge of; the government appointed only the chairman of the lower court. An orphan's court was established under each city magistrate, dealing with the affairs of widows and young orphans of the townspeople.

The role of supervisory authorities in each province was performed by provincial prosecutors and their assistants - criminal and civil attorneys. Subordinate to the provincial prosecutor were the prosecutors at the upper zemstvo court, the provincial magistrate and the upper justice, as well as the district solicitor, who performed the duties of the prosecutor in the district.

Noble self-government In her domestic policy, Catherine II focused primarily on the nobility, and already in the first years of her reign the foundations for self-government of this class were laid. In preparation for the convening of the Statutory Commission in 1766, the nobles of each district were ordered to elect a district leader for two years to lead the elections of deputies to the Commission and in case of any other demands from the supreme power.

The reform of 1775 increased the influence of the nobility on local government, gave it a class organization, granting rights legal entity district noble assembly. The charter granted to the nobility in 1785 strengthened the position of this class. It recorded the previously existing rights and benefits of the nobility: freedom from taxes and corporal punishment, from civil service, the right to full ownership of land and serfs, the right to be judged only by their equals, etc. The charter also gave the nobility some new privileges, in particular, the confiscation of the estates of nobles for criminal offenses was prohibited, it was easier to obtain nobility, etc. In addition, in 1785, the provincial nobility, like the district nobility before, was granted the rights of a legal entity as a single whole.

Ultimately, the system of noble governance that developed during the reign of Catherine II had the following form. Once every three years, at district and provincial assemblies, the nobles elected district and provincial noble leaders and other officials, respectively. Only that nobleman whose income from the estate was not less than 100 rubles could be elected. in year. Nobles who had reached the age of 25 and had the rank of officer could participate in the elections. In addition to electing officials, noble assemblies resolved issues posed by the government, as well as problems related to class discipline. In addition, the assemblies had the right to present their wishes to the governor or governor general; a specially elected deputation led by the leader of the nobility could appeal to the empress.

City self-government In 1785, a Charter was also published on the rights and benefits of the cities of the Russian Empire, which later became known as the Charter of Cities. During its development, some wishes from the city orders of the Statutory Commission were taken into account, as well as the charters that determined the structure of the Baltic cities, in particular Riga. These statutes were based on Magdeburg (after the name of the city in Germany), or German law, which developed in the Middle Ages on the basis of the right to self-government won by the townspeople, as well as on the basis of acts regulating craft and trade.

From now on, a coat of arms became mandatory for each city, which should “be used in all city affairs.” It was established that the coat of arms county town should include the emblem of the provincial city. All coats of arms, existing or new, were approved by the empress herself.

In accordance with the Charter, the population of each city was divided into six categories. The first included “real city dwellers,” i.e. everyone, without distinction of origin, rank or occupation, who has a house or land in the city. The second category consisted of merchants, divided into three guilds depending on the amount of capital: 1st guild - from 10 to 50 thousand rubles, 2nd - from 5 to 10 thousand rubles, 3rd - from 1 to 5 thousand roubles. The third category included urban guild artisans, the fourth - out-of-town and foreign guests who permanently resided in a given city. The fifth category consisted of “famous citizens” - elected officials, scientists and artists (painters, sculptors, architects, composers) with academic certificates or university diplomas, persons with capital from 50 thousand rubles, bankers with capital from 100 to 200 thousand rubles, wholesalers, shipowners. The sixth category included “townspeople” - townspeople engaged in crafts, trades, etc., and not included in other categories. Citizens of the third and sixth categories received the general name “philistines”. The entire population of the city, in accordance with their category, was included in the City Philistine Book.

Citizens of all ranks from the age of 25 had the right to elect a city head and councilors (representatives from ranks) from among themselves to the general city duma once every three years. The nobles were not widely represented in the city duma, since they had the right to refuse to perform city posts. The general city duma met once every three years or, if necessary, it was in charge of the city’s economy and was obliged to report to the governor on all income and expenses. In addition, the General Duma elected six representatives (one from each rank) to the six-vote Duma, whose meetings were held every week under the chairmanship of the mayor. The Six-Voice Duma was in charge of the collection of taxes, the fulfillment of government duties, the improvement of the city, its expenses and income, i.e. was the executive body of city government. Supervision of city self-government was carried out by the governor, to whom the six-vocal Duma could turn for help.

The rights of the city as a whole were protected by the city magistrate, who interceded for the city before the highest authorities and ensured that no new taxes or duties were imposed on it without the order of the government.

Pay attention to this side of Russian public life Catherine II was forced by countless abuses of the administration and widespread discontent among the population. In 1766, Catherine issued a manifesto electing deputies from all localities and positions to the commission to discuss local needs. The nobles sent a deputy from each district; city dwellers one by one from the city; other classes and ranks, one from their province.

The election of deputies and the delivery of orders to them took place under the leadership of an elected leader for noble societies and an elected head for urban ones. All orders expressed a very definite idea about the need for education local government with social forces and on limiting the broad powers of crown officials. The result of this social order was the emergence of the most significant legislative acts until the second half of the 19th century, defining and enshrining certain principles of local self-government on the territory of the Russian Empire: the Institution on Governorates (1775-1780) and the Charter of Rights and Benefits to the Cities of the Russian Empire (Gorodovoe Regulations) (1785).

Under Catherine II, the development of public administration and local self-government continued. In November 1775, the “Institution for the Administration of the Provinces of the Russian Empire” was published. In the introductory part of this document, it was noted that the need for a new reform is due to the fact that the existing provinces are very large in size and the structure of provincial government is imperfect. Under Catherine II, the number of provinces was increased to 51. The capital provinces and large regions (they included two provinces each) were now headed by major dignitaries and governors responsible to the queen. They were, as a rule, endowed with extraordinary powers. The provinces were governed by governors appointed by the Senate and provincial boards (the latter, like the Landrats, were actually subordinate to the governors).

Having divided the empire into provinces and districts, putting governors at the head of the provinces and creating local self-government bodies, where local elected people sat along with native officials, Catherine sought to implement the principle of decentralization of power and create separate self-governing units locally.

All officials and the institutions of the regions (provinces) were divided into three groups: 1. The first - administrative and police - included the governor, the provincial government and the Order of Public Charity (this body consisted of assessors from the provincial class courts and managed schools, medical and charitable institutions, "work" and "straithouses"). 2. The second group of provincial institutions were financial and economic. The main one was the treasury chamber, whose functions included tax affairs, financial control, management of state property, contracts, supervision of private trade and industry, and conducting accounting and statistical work on audits - population censuses. As a rule, the vice-governor was in charge of the treasury chamber. 3. The third group of provincial institutions included the courts - the chambers of the criminal court and the chamber of the civil court. In the provinces of that time there functioned the upper zemstvo court for the nobles, the provincial magistrate for the townspeople, the upper reprisal for the state, palace peasants, and coachmen. In the provinces there was also a prosecutor's service headed by the provincial prosecutor. Another document of particular interest is the “Charter of Grant for Rights and Benefits to the Cities of the Russian Empire,” adopted by Catherine II in 1785. The “Charter of Grant of Rights and Benefits to the Cities of the Russian Empire” of 1785 established the rights and privileges of cities. It secured the city’s ownership of its “lands, gardens, fields, pastures, meadows, rivers, fisheries, forests, groves, bushes, empty places, water or windmills...”. Cities were given the opportunity to have schools, mills, taverns, taverns, herbergs, taverns, organize fairs, and establish places and times for trade. The townspeople were obliged to bear the established “burdens”, i.e. duties and fees that local authorities could not increase without government permission. Nobles, military and civil officials were completely exempt from taxes and services. Each city had to have its own coat of arms. The rights of the population were protected by the city magistrate, who ensured that they were not subject to new duties and fees without approval. The magistrate petitioned the higher authorities about the needs of the city. The urban population was divided into 6 categories or electoral curiae, entered into the city philistine book: 1. The category of “real city inhabitants” included persons who owned real estate within the city. 2. Owners of a certain amount of capital belonged to the category of guild merchants. 3. Belonging to the category of guild artisans was determined by registration in a guild. 4. The definition of non-resident and foreign guests follows from its very name. 5. The grounds for belonging to one of the 7 divisions of the category of “eminent citizens” were: two-time appointment to an elected position in the city, a university or academic diploma for the title of scientist or artist, issued by Russian main schools (not foreign), capital of a certain size, occupation of wholesale ( not shop) trade, possession of sea ships. 6. The 6th category of “posadsky” included persons engaged in any kind of trade.

Elections to the General City Duma were held once every three years. The mayor presided over the General City Duma. When voting, vowels from each category had only one vote, so it did not matter that the number of vowels from different categories was different. The General Duma elected from among its members the Six-Party Duma, which was responsible for the most intensive activities in managing current city affairs. This institution included the mayor and six vowels - one from each category of “city society”, which was supposed to include the entire permanent population of the city, and membership in which was determined not by class status, but by a certain property qualification. The Six-Voice Duma was not only an executive body under the General Duma. Its jurisdiction was subject to the same range of issues as for the General Duma. The only difference was that the latter met to consider more complex issues, and the former for the day-to-day management of current affairs. The competence of the six-vocal Duma included the following areas of life of the “city society”: - providing the urban population with food; -preventing quarrels and litigation between the city and surrounding cities and villages; - keeping order; -providing the city with the necessary supplies; -protection of city buildings, construction of squares, piers, barns, shops needed by the city; -increase in city revenues; resolution of controversial issues that arose in workshops and guilds. In addition to the General and Six-Party Dumas, the Regulations of 1785 also established a third body - a meeting of the “city society”. At the beginning of 1786, new institutions were introduced in Moscow and St. Petersburg, and then in other cities of the Empire. However, in most county towns, simplified self-government was soon introduced: a direct meeting of all members of the city society and with it a small elected council of representatives different groups urban population for the management of current affairs. In small urban settlements, the collegial principle was completely destroyed, and all self-government was represented by the so-called “city elders”.

When you first get acquainted with the Charter Granted to Cities, it gives the impression of a broadly conceived reform, but in reality its results, like the reforms laid down in the Institution on Governorates, turned out to be quite pathetic. Local self-government during Catherine's time suffered the same fate as Peter's Landrats and Zemstvo Commissars. Instead of subordinating the administration to the control of local elected bodies, the Establishment on Governorates, on the contrary, gives the bureaucracy, accustomed to power and arbitrariness, the right of control and leadership over young, newly created institutions, and therefore the role of new self-government bodies remained extremely insignificant until the reform of 1864 years when zemstvo and new city institutions were introduced.

But, despite this, the importance of Catherine’s reforms is difficult to overestimate: if Peter’s reforms, with individual attempts to encourage society to demonstrate initiative, generally amounted to centralization and the imposition of bureaucracy, then Catherine’s legislative acts were aimed at decentralizing power and creating local public administration, with who had to share their power with crown officials: “The institution on the provinces of Catherine II cannot but be called the main legislation for our local government,” noted A.D. Gradovsky.

It was the legislation of Catherine II that can be considered the first attempt to form Russian municipal law.

All members of the “city society” could participate in it, but only those who had reached the age of 25 and had capital, the interest on which generated an income of at least 50 rubles, had the right to vote and passive suffrage. The competence of this meeting included: - elections of the city mayor, burgomasters and ratmans, assessors of the provincial magistrate and conscience court, elders and deputies for compiling the city philistine book; -presenting your thoughts on the needs of the city to the governor; -issuance of resolutions; -preparation of responses to the governor’s proposals; -exclusion from “civil society” of citizens discredited by the courts. A meeting of the “city society” could meet only with the permission of the governor-general or governor once every three years in the winter. However, in the province the implementation of the City Regulations encountered many difficulties, and simplified self-government had to be introduced. Instead of three bodies - the meeting of the “city society”, the general and six-vocal councils - there were only two: a direct meeting of all citizens and a small elected council of representatives of different groups of the city population to carry out common affairs. The most significant reform transformations were carried out in the early 60s of the 19th century, when, shortly after the abolition of serfdom, Alexander II signed a decree to the government Senate on the implementation of the Regulations on Zemstvo Institutions from January 1, 1864. The main factor that contributed to the birth of the zemstvo was the decree of February 19, 1861, according to which more than 20 million serfs received “freedom”. Immediately after the abolition of serfdom, the peasant social structure in rural areas (according to the Regulations of 1861) consisted of class volosts. The volost administration consisted of a volost assembly, a volost foreman with a volost administration, and a volost peasant court. Peasant public administration positions were filled by choice for three years. The village assembly and the village headman constituted the rural public administration. The gathering elected rural officials, decided on matters regarding the use of communal land, issues of public needs, improvement, charity, teaching literacy to members of rural society, carried out the distribution of government taxes, zemstvo and worldly monetary fees, etc. The village headman was vested with extensive powers both in public affairs, within the competence of the village public administration, and in administrative and police matters (protection of public order, security of persons and property, passport control). In the absence of a village headman, the decisions of the village meeting were considered illegal.

The zemstvo (1864) and city (1870) reforms pursued the goal of decentralizing management and developing the principles of local self-government in Russia. The reforms were based on two ideas. The first is the election of power: all local government bodies were elected and controlled by voters. In addition, these bodies were under the control of representative power, and both branches of government were controlled by the Law. Zemstvos were supporters state power, maintained legality and stability in society. Second idea: local government had real financial basis of its activities. In the 19th century up to 60% of all payments collected from the territories remained at the disposal of the zemstvo, i.e., cities and counties, 20% each went to the state treasury and the province. On January 1, 1864, the “Regulations on provincial and district zemstvo institutions” were established. According to this “Regulation”, zemstvos were all-class bodies. Wanting to make the zemstvos more manageable, with the predominant influence of the ruling classes in them, the law provided, for example, for the division of district voters into three curiae for the election of a district zemstvo assembly. The “Regulations on provincial and district institutions for peasant affairs” established the positions of peace intermediaries, district peace congresses and provincial presences for peasant affairs to control peasant administration and resolve possible misunderstandings between peasants and landowners. Local hereditary noble landowners who met certain property conditions were elected to the position of peace intermediaries. World mediators subsequently acquired considerable influence in zemstvo institutions. This was facilitated by the fact that they acted as zemstvo councilors and heads of peasant self-government, who had the opportunity to put pressure on the election of councilors from among the peasants.

Under such conditions, volost and rural self-government did not develop. The main disadvantage of peasant self-government was the preservation of the class principle in its formation. The bodies of peasant public administration were under dual control both from local institutions for peasant affairs, the main composition of which was formed from landowners, and from the judicial and administrative bodies, whose representatives simultaneously filled positions in peasant administration. The mass dissatisfaction of the peasants with their situation, the awareness of the local nobility of the disastrous state of affairs in the provinces led to a surge in political and social activity, retaliatory repressions of the administrative apparatus, and an open struggle of confrontation at all levels of government, including the government and the imperial court. The result was the approval by Alexander II of a compromise Regulation on zemstvo institutions, which, after publication on January 1, 1864, was extended to thirty-four provinces of European Russia within several years. The actual introduction of zemstvo institutions began in February 1865 and in most provinces ended by 1867.

The implementation of the Regulations on Zemstvo Institutions was entrusted to temporary district commissions, consisting of the leader of the nobility, police officer, city mayor and officials from the chamber of state property and from the office of appanage peasants. These commissions compiled electoral lists and presumably set dates for convening electoral congresses. Both were finally approved by the provincial temporary commission, led by the governor. At the first zemstvo meeting, a council was elected, which was supposed to present its views on various aspects of the economy at the first regular meeting and take over the management of the capital that belonged to the pre-reform institutions.

The regulations of 1864 divided voters into 3 curia:

1. landowners of all classes,
2. citizens - owners of real estate in the city,
3. rural societies.

The first curia included landowners who had at least 200 acres of land or other real estate worth up to 15 thousand rubles; This also included residents who had an annual income of up to 6 thousand rubles. The second curia included mainly urban residents - homeowners, merchants, and factory owners. held their meetings without interconnection with the congresses of the first and third curiae. However, residents with an annual income of up to 6 thousand rubles could participate in the elections of “vowels”. or owning real estate up to 4 thousand rubles (in small towns - up to 500 rubles). The third curia included peasants, unlike the first two curias, they were multi-degree. From the peasant curia, not only representatives of the clergy, burghers, but even landowners often became members of the zemstvo assembly. Elections were carried out separately: the first two curiae were held at congresses of their representatives. Large and medium-sized landowners could be present at the congress of representatives of the first curia. Small landowners elected representatives from among themselves. The congress of representatives of the second curia was attended by homeowners, factory owners, factory owners, merchants and other wealthy citizens. The following could not take part in the elections: a) persons under 25 years of age; b) tried and not acquitted by the court; c) removed from office; d) under trial and investigation; e) declared insolvent; f) excluded from the spiritual department.

The elections of vowels from the peasants were multi-stage: first, rural societies sent their representatives to the volost assembly, electors were elected at the volost assemblies, and then a set number of vowels for the district zemstvo assembly were chosen from among them.

From the statistical tables given in the book by M.I. Sveshnikov’s “Fundamentals and Limits of Self-Government”, it is clear that the number of vowels in different counties was not the same. Even within one province the difference could be 4-5 times. So, in Voronezh province The zemstvo assembly of the Biryuchinsky district consisted of 61 vowels, and the Korotoyak district - of 12 vowels.

If at the congress the number of voters did not exceed the number of people who had to be elected, then all those who came to the congress were recognized as members of the zemstvo assembly without holding elections. Vowels were elected for 3 years.

After the election of the councilors, most often in the fall, district zemstvo assemblies gathered, which were usually chaired by district leaders of the nobility. At the first meeting, the district councilors elected provincial councilors from among themselves: from 6 districts - 1 provincial councilor. The provincial zemstvo assemblies included leaders of the nobility, chairmen of all district councils, and 2-3 officials from state and appanage estates. Thus, more high level zemstvo self-government was formed on the basis of indirect elections and representation of officials.

Provincial meetings were held once a year, but emergency meetings could also be convened. The meetings were presided over by the provincial leader of the nobility. For current work both district and provincial assemblies elected councils consisting of 3 people: a chairman and two members (the number of members of zemstvo councils could be increased to 4 in counties, to 6-8 in provinces).

The basis of the Regulations of 1864 was the principle of property qualifications, and the interests of noble landowners were brought to the fore, while the interests of industrialists and peasants were taken into account little. The predominant influence on local affairs was given to the nobility.

The participation of zemstvo institutions in public education and in the creation of conditions for public health care was allowed only in economic terms, i.e. The zemstvo could allocate certain sums for public education and for the medical sector, but it did not have the right to dispose of these sums. Economic affairs that fell under the jurisdiction of the zemstvo also included matters of mutual insurance and the development of trade and crafts.

But even within such narrow limits, zemstvos did not enjoy freedom and independence: many zemstvo resolutions, loans, and draft estimates required approval by the governor or the minister of internal affairs. Each resolution could be appealed by the governor. Cases regarding such protests were decided in the final instance by the Senate. Finally, by leaving local police power under the jurisdiction of government agencies and thereby depriving the zemstvo of executive power, the law of 1864 further weakened them. To collect taxes belonging to the zemstvo, there was only one way left - turning to the “assistance” of the local police, which did not always ensure the implementation of zemstvo orders.

Among the first provinces where zemstvos began their activities immediately after the adoption of the “Regulations” were Samara, Penza, Kostroma, Novgorod, Kherson, Pskov, Kursk, Yaroslavl, Poltava, Moscow, Kazan, St. Petersburg, Ryazan, Voronezh, Kaluga, Nizhny Novgorod and Tambov. The zemstvo institutions of the district included the zemstvo assembly and the zemstvo council with the institutions attached to them. The zemstvo assembly consisted of: - zemstvo vowels; - members ex officio (chairman of the state property management, deputy from the ecclesiastical department, mayor of the county town, representatives of the county department). The Zemstvo Assembly met annually for one session, no later than October. The session lasted ten days. The governor could extend it. The district marshal of the nobility presided over the district zemstvo meeting. The responsibilities of the zemstvo were divided into two groups - mandatory and optional: Mandatory functions included the maintenance of peace mediators and judges, prison premises and apartments for police officers, stage duty, construction and repair of large roads, allocation of carts for travel of police officers, gendarmes and other government officials . Optional functions included: insurance of agricultural buildings against fires, maintenance of city hospitals and almshouses, repair of roads and bridges, food assistance to the population. The day before February Revolution In 1917, zemstvos existed in 43 provinces of Russia with a total population of about 110 million inhabitants. The viability of the zemstvo was ensured by its two basic principles: self-government and self-financing. Self-government of zemstvos was manifested in many aspects: in the election of governing bodies, in the formation of management structures, determination of the main directions of their activities, selection and training of specialists, formation and distribution of the local budget. After the October Revolution, the widespread liquidation of zemstvos began (the Bolsheviks considered zemstvo self-government a legacy of the bourgeois system), which was completed by the summer of 1918. The liquidation of zemstvos was a completely natural process, because local self-government provides for decentralization of power, economic-social, financial and, to a certain extent, political independence, independence, and the ideas of socialism were based on the state of the proletarian dictatorship, i.e. the state is centralized in nature.

Introduction. 3

Local government under Catherine II. 4

Conclusion. 12

References: 14

Introduction

Regional administration was a convenient ground for Catherine on which she could sow political ideas she borrowed from the liberal teachings of European publicists. Moreover, special considerations prompted her to pay primary attention to the reorganization of regional administration.

Pugachev's rebellion, which plunged into horror noble Russia, had important consequences for determining the further domestic policy of Catherine II. First of all, the Empress was convinced of deep conservatism lower strata population of the empire. Secondly, it became clear that, despite all the costs, only the nobility could be the true support of the throne. Finally, thirdly, the uprising clearly demonstrated the deep crisis of society and, therefore, the impossibility of further postponing reforms that should have been carried out gradually, step by step, through slow everyday work. The first fruit of the reform was one of the most significant legislative acts of Catherine’s reign - “The Establishment for the Administration of the Provinces of the All-Russian Empire.”

The publication and implementation of the Institutions marked the beginning of the provincial reform, the main content of which was related to the reorganization of the local government system. The need for such a reform was dictated by the very logic of development autocratic state, requiring the creation of a strictly centralized and unified system, in which every cell of a vast territory and every inhabitant would be under the vigilant control of the government. These demands had to be linked with the class interests manifested in the activities of the Statutory Commission, and above all with the interests of the nobility. At the same time, Catherine did not forget about her plans for the formation of a third estate in the state.

Local government under Catherine II.

In November 1775, the “Institution for the Administration of the Provinces of the Russian Empire” was published. In the introductory part of this document, it was noted that the need for a new reform is due to the fact that the existing provinces are very large in size and the structure of provincial government is imperfect.

Under Catherine II, the number of provinces was increased to 51. The capital provinces and large regions (they included two provinces each) were now headed by major dignitaries and governors responsible to the queen. They were, as a rule, endowed with extraordinary powers. The provinces were governed by governors appointed by the Senate and provincial boards (the latter, like the Landrats, were actually subordinate to the governors). All officials and institutions of the regions (provinces) were divided into three groups:

1. The first - administrative and police - included the governor, the provincial government and the Order of Public Charity (this body consisted of assessors from the provincial estate courts and managed schools, medical and charitable institutions, “work” and “restraint” houses).

2. The second group of provincial institutions were financial and economic. The main one was the treasury chamber, whose functions included tax affairs, financial control, management of state property, contracts, supervision of private trade and industry, and conducting accounting and statistical work on audits - population censuses. As a rule, the vice-governor was in charge of the treasury chamber.

3. The third group of provincial institutions included the courts - the chambers of the criminal court and the chamber of the civil court. In the provinces of that time there functioned the upper zemstvo court for the nobles, the provincial magistrate for the townspeople, the upper reprisal for the state, palace peasants, and coachmen. In the provinces there was also a prosecutor's service headed by the provincial prosecutor.

Another document of particular interest is the “Charter of Grant for Rights and Benefits to the Cities of the Russian Empire,” adopted by Catherine II in 1785.

The “Charter of Grant for Rights and Benefits to the Cities of the Russian Empire” of 1785 established the rights and privileges of cities. It secured the city’s ownership of its “lands, gardens, fields, pastures, meadows, rivers, fisheries, forests, groves, bushes, empty places, water or windmills...”. Cities were given the opportunity to have schools, mills, taverns, taverns, herbergs, taverns, organize fairs, and establish places and times for trade. The townspeople were obliged to bear the established “burdens”, i.e. duties and fees that local authorities could not increase without government permission. Nobles, military and civil officials were completely exempt from taxes and services. Each city had to have its own coat of arms.

The rights of the population were protected by the city magistrate, who ensured that they were not subject to new duties and fees without approval. The magistrate petitioned the higher authorities about the needs of the city.

The urban population was divided into 6 categories or electoral curiae, entered in the city philistine register:

1. The category of “real city dwellers” included persons who owned real estate within the city.

2. Owners of a certain amount of capital belonged to the category of guild merchants.

3. Belonging to the category of guild artisans was determined by registration in a guild.

4. The definition of non-resident and foreign guests follows from its very name.

5. The grounds for belonging to one of the 7 divisions of the category of “eminent citizens” were: two-time appointment to an elected position in the city, a university or academic diploma for the title of scientist or artist, issued by Russian main schools (not foreign), capital of a certain size, occupation of wholesale ( not shop) trade, possession of sea ships.

6. The 6th category of “posadsky” included persons engaged in any kind of trade.

The General Duma elected from among its members the Six-Party Duma, which led direct work for managing current city affairs. This institution included the mayor and six vowels - one from each category of the “city society”. The Six-Voice Duma was not only an executive body under the General Duma. Its jurisdiction was subject to the same range of issues as for the General Duma. The only difference was that the latter met to consider more complex issues, and the former for the day-to-day management of current affairs.

The competence of the six-vocal Duma included the following areas of activity of the “city society”:

providing the urban population with food;

preventing quarrels and litigation between the city and surrounding cities and villages;

law enforcement;

providing the city with necessary supplies;

protection of city buildings, construction of squares, piers, barns, shops needed by the city;

increase in city revenues; resolution of controversial issues that arose in workshops and guilds.

In addition to the General and Six-Party Dumas, the Regulations of 1785 also established a third body - a meeting of the “city society”. All members of the “city society” could participate in it, but only those who had reached the age of 25 and had capital, the interest on which generated an income of at least 50 rubles, had the right to vote and passive suffrage. The competence of this meeting included:

elections of the city mayor, burgomasters and ratmans, assessors of the provincial magistrate and conscience court, elders and deputies for compiling the city philistine book;

presenting your thoughts on the needs of the city to the governor;

issuance of resolutions;

preparing responses to the governor’s proposals;

exclusion from “civil society” of citizens discredited in court.

A meeting of the “city society” could meet only with the permission of the governor-general or governor once every three years in the winter.

However, in the province the implementation of the City Regulations encountered many difficulties, and simplified self-government had to be introduced. Instead of three bodies - the meeting of the “city society”, the general and six-vocal councils - there were only two: a direct meeting of all citizens and a small elected council of representatives of different groups of the city population to carry out common affairs.

The most significant reform transformations were carried out in the early 60s of the 19th century, when, shortly after the abolition of serfdom, Alexander II signed a decree to the government Senate on the implementation of the Regulations on Zemstvo Institutions from January 1, 1864.

The main factor that contributed to the birth of the zemstvo was the decree of February 19, 1861, according to which more than 20 million serfs received “freedom”.

On January 1, 1864, the “Regulations on provincial and district zemstvo institutions” were established. According to this “Regulation”, zemstvos were all-class bodies. Wanting to make the zemstvos more manageable, with the predominant influence of the ruling classes in them, the law provided, for example, for the division of district voters into three curiae for the election of a district zemstvo assembly.

The second curia included mainly urban residents - homeowners, merchants, and factory owners. held their meetings without interconnection with the congresses of the first and third curiae. However, residents with an annual income of up to 6 thousand rubles could participate in the elections of “vowels”. or owning real estate up to 4 thousand rubles (in small towns - up to 500 rubles).

The third curia included peasants, unlike the first two curias, they were multi-degree. From the peasant curia, not only representatives of the clergy, burghers, but even landowners often became members of the zemstvo assembly.

According to data from 1865-1867, in 29 provinces (in those where zemstvos were introduced), landowners-nobles and officials among the district “vocals” accounted for about 42%, peasants - more than 38, merchants - over 10, representatives of other classes - about 10 %.

The zemstvo institutions of the district included the zemstvo assembly and the zemstvo council with the institutions attached to them.

The Zemstvo Assembly consisted of:

Zemsky vowels;

Members ex officio (chairman of the state property management, deputy from the ecclesiastical department, mayor of the county town, representatives of the county department).

The Zemstvo Assembly met annually for one session, no later than October. The session lasted ten days. The governor could extend it. The district marshal of the nobility presided over the district zemstvo meeting.

The duties of the zemstvo were divided into two groups - mandatory and optional:

Mandatory functions included the maintenance of peace mediators and judges, prison premises and apartments for police officers, military service, construction and repair of large roads, provision of carts for travel of police officers, gendarmes and other government officials.

Optional functions included: insurance of agricultural buildings against fires, maintenance of city hospitals and almshouses, repair of roads and bridges, food assistance to the population.

On the eve of the February Revolution of 1917, zemstvos existed in 43 provinces of Russia with a total population of about 110 million inhabitants.

The viability of the zemstvo was ensured by its two basic principles: self-government and self-financing.

Self-government of zemstvos was manifested in many aspects: in the election of governing bodies, in the formation of management structures, determination of the main directions of their activities, selection and training of specialists, formation and distribution of the local budget.

After the October Revolution, the widespread liquidation of zemstvos began (the Bolsheviks considered zemstvo self-government a legacy of the bourgeois system), which was completed by the summer of 1918.

The liquidation of the zemstvo was a completely natural process, because local self-government provides for decentralization of power, economic-social, financial and, to a certain extent, political independence, independence, and the ideas of socialism were based on the state of the proletarian dictatorship, i.e. the state is centralized in nature.

During the development of local self-government in pre-revolutionary Russia, it is possible to highlight the basic principles that are a feature of the Russian municipal school:

the principle of diversity of forms of organization of local self-government, which is associated with the peculiarities of the socio-economic development of the territory of the Russian Empire, with significant differences in cultural, national and religious traditions;

the principle of non-participation (prohibition) of local government bodies in active political life, because it was believed that the main task of local authorities was to satisfy the priority needs of the population and the state strictly ensured that local governments did not go beyond these boundaries;

the principle of delimiting subjects of jurisdiction and resources between levels of government (the distinctions were not based on the principle of sufficiency, but on the principle of the highest efficiency in their use by a given level);

the principle of transferring relatively broad rights in the economic and business sphere to local governments (naturally, while maintaining the authority of the center). There were several reasons for this: the vast territories of the empire; And fast development in the second half of the 19th and early 20th centuries. city and zemstvo education, health care, culture.

Unfortunately, the experience of local government, primarily zemstvo, accumulated before the revolution, was actually discarded and forgotten.

Conclusion

During all periods of the formation of Russia as a single and great power, especially during periods of crisis, two trends were clearly evident: unification on the basis of a strong central government and disunion, sovereignization of the territories that comprise it. The reason for this was both objective historical and socio-economic conditions, and the subjective desire of appanage owners, or regional elites, in modern political terms, to be omnipotent masters within their limited, but self-sufficient, from their point of view, limits.

Along with the two noted main trends, at all stages of the development of statehood, sometimes clearly, sometimes to a less noticeable extent, a third was also manifested - the formation and development of local self-government. During periods of disunity, self-government was one of the management tools for regional authorities. With the strengthening of central power, self-government was largely a compromise between the supreme power and the territories that were part of a single state. Recognition of the territories' rights to self-government smoothed out the severity of the confrontation between the center and the regions.

Now, when Russia is once again going through a period of formation and development of forms of local self-government, it is interesting to turn to its historical experience, which is what was done in this work. In conclusion, the following conclusions can be drawn.

Zemstvo reform of 1864 together with other reforms of the 60-70s in Russia influenced the change in the power structures of the state and caused new social conflicts in the field of management.

The reform of local government was caused by political and administrative-economic necessity. By introducing zemstvos, the government pursued threefold goals. Firstly, about 23 million former serfs demanded new principles of local government. Secondly, it was a concession to the liberal provincial noble society. And thirdly, the central government tried to improve the organization of extremely neglected local government.

It is indisputable that zemstvo self-government in Russia since the last quarter of the 19th century. has acquired the character of a viable state institute and expressed the interests of broad groups of the population. This is also evidenced by statistical material. By February 1917, zemstvo self-government existed in 43 provinces of Russia, and its competence extended to 110 million inhabitants. At the same time, one should not go to the other extreme, as is often the case in recent publications, and idealize zemstvo self-government in pre-revolutionary Russia as a kind of conflict-free model of relations between the power elite and local governments.

Bibliography:

1. E. V. Anisimov, A. B. Kamensky. “Russia in the 18th - first half of the 19th centuries.” M.: Miros, 1994

2. A. N. Sakharov “History of Russia from the beginning of the 18th to the end of the 19th century.” M.: AST, 1996

3. Reader on the history of Russia, M. 1999.

4. Isaev I.A. History of state and law of Russia. M.: Lawyer, 1999.

5. Vladimirsky-Budanov M. F. Review of the history of Russian law. Rostov-on-Don: Phoenix, 1995.

6. Russian legislation of the 10th-20th centuries. T. 7. - M., 1994.

Editor's Choice

Deciphering the natal chart of the house

Your Zodiac sign makes up only 50% of your personality. The remaining 50% cannot be known by reading general horoscopes. You need to create an individual...

What does mulberry help with?

Description of the white mulberry plant. Composition and calorie content of berries, beneficial properties and expected harm. Delicious recipes and uses...

Photo report “Birthday of Samuil Yakovlevich Marshak in the group”

Like most of his colleagues, Soviet children's writers and poets, Samuil Marshak did not immediately begin writing for children. He was born in 1887...

Breathing at high pressure Breathing correctly at high pressure

Breathing exercises using the Strelnikova method help cope with attacks of high blood pressure. Correct execution of exercises -...

Bryansk State University named after

About the university Bryansk State University named after academician I.G. Petrovsky is the largest university in the region, with more than 14...

Tasks to test spelling and punctuation literacy

Question No. 1.

Macroeconomic calendar

The Forex Economic Calendar is a reference book for every trader, regardless of trading experience and level of professionalism, and especially...

Representatives of the arachnid class are creatures that have lived next to humans for many centuries. But this time it turned out...

Why do you dream of wedding shoes? Why do you dream of wedding shoes with heels?

Girls and women almost always associate white shoes with a wedding dress, although the white color of shoes has long been no longer required. A...

New

Popular