Speransky: life and work. Political activities of Speransky

Alexander and the house were full of things to do. The secret committee disintegrated, but the emperor had new person, who alone was worth an entire committee, is Mikhail Mikhailovich Speransky (1772–1839).

He was the son of a village priest, “priest”, as the royal entourage contemptuously called him. The first place of study was Vladimir Seminary. There he received his last name - for his outstanding abilities. The father's last name was Tretyakov, and the new student was written down by Speransky as “promising,” from the Latin sperare - “to hope, to hope.”

Among the best graduates, Speransky entered the main seminary at the Alexander Nevsky Monastery in St. Petersburg, from which he successfully graduated. He was offered a teaching position in the same seminary, courses in mathematics, physics, eloquence and philosophy, but fate prepared for him a more prestigious place. He became the household secretary of Prince A.

B. Kurakina. The prince had a tutor - a German from Prussia, Brückner. The young people became friends. The receptive Speransky was imbued with the liberal spirit and became an admirer of Voltaire, Diderot and the encyclopedists.

Having ascended the throne, Pavel appointed Kurakin as prosecutor general.

In 1797, Speransky began working in the prince's office, where he established himself in the best possible way. Under Alexander I, his career quickly took off. He moved to the Ministry of Internal Affairs with the rank of Secretary of State. His responsibility was to prepare various reports and reports for the ministry. He could write superbly. Here, for example, is how he conquered Prince Kurakin. Before you take young man as his secretary, Kurakin gave him an exam, instructing him to write ten business letters on the same topic to different people.

One night was enough for Speransky. The prince's delight was complete.

In 1806, due to the illness of Kochubey, then the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Speransky was sent to the sovereign with papers and a report. This sealed his fate. When characterizing the relationship between the tsar and his brilliant official, one can even use the word “became friends.” Going to Vitebsk to review the 1st Army, Alexander took Speransky with him.

After this trip, Speransky was dismissed from the Ministry of Internal Affairs, retaining the rank of Secretary of State. In 1808, Speransky was present in the emperor's retinue at the Erfurt meeting with Napoleon.

In the fall of 1808, Alexander instructed Speransky to develop a project for new government reforms.

The tsar showed great curiosity about this, sometimes the two of them spent whole evenings discussing the upcoming work, comparing various systems of European governance.

And what ideas were discussed? It is necessary, for example, that the legislative assembly should not have the power to sanction its own regulations, but its opinions, completely free, should be the exact expression of the popular desires. Or... the members of the judiciary should be freely chosen by the people, but the supervision of the observance of judicial forms and the protection of public safety would rest with the government.

V. O. Klyuchevsky: “Speransky brought to the unkempt Russian office of the 18th century an unusually straightened mind, the ability to work endlessly and an excellent ability to speak and write.”

In 1807, a security committee was created in Russia, and in 1809 two decrees appeared - on court ranks and on rank exams, which were supposed to increase the educational level of officials. They no longer favor officials as much as before. The court ranks of chamber cadet and chamberlain, previously equated according to the Table of Ranks with the highest military and civilian ranks, turned into honorary titles.

Alexander entrusted Speransky with the leadership of the commission for drawing up state laws, as well as the development of a plan for state transformation.

And this work was done. Speransky was a theorist. Remember, we had “paper architecture” under Khrushchev and then under Brezhnev - brilliant, I’m not afraid to use this word, projects of our best architects, which, due to the thoughtlessness of the authorities, were not put into practice. The same was the case with Speransky. His work was called “Introduction to the Code of State Laws.”

He created on paper an unusually harmonious system of government. Three rows of institutions - legislative, judicial and executive - permeated the entire state system from the volost to St. Petersburg and were of a zemstvo, elective nature.

The State Duma is the legislative branch, the Senate is the judicial branch, and the ministries are the executive branch. These three institutions were united by the State Council: thirty-five members headed by the emperor. The Council is a deliberative institution; it reviews laws before they are submitted to the Duma, and then monitors the implementation of these laws.

The implementation of Speransky's plans began with the formation of the State Council (January 1, 1810). This was followed by the transformation of ministries... and then everything came to a standstill.

There were many reasons for this. Soviet historiography assigns an inordinately large role in this stop to Arakcheev, another favorite of the tsar, a faithful, dedicated, but inert man. Arakcheev served as Minister of War, he was preparing for the war with Napoleon, and in his free time he fiercely hated Speransky.

The nobles also strongly disliked the reformer, considering him a “rootless priest” and an “upstart.” The public suspected him of terrible sins: he traveled with the Tsar to Erfurt and probably sold himself to the usurper; it is not for nothing that he uses the “Napoleonic Code” in his legislative projects.

Among other things, Speransky’s plan provided for the liberation of serfs (without land), and this, excuse me, “is not possible.” Alexander’s entourage all shouted with one voice: “It’s early! There will be a riot!

Speransky's reform project - briefly

We only needed a second Pugachev!” The mouthpiece of public opinion was Karamzin, who in his note “On Ancient and New Russia” (1811) argued that we do not need reforms, but “patriarchal power and virtue.” (Lord, how similar everything is!

But two hundred years have passed! - Author) Power should be, Karamzin argued, more “preservative than creative.” Russia does not need a constitution, but fifty efficient governors.

Again, I can’t stand it: where can I get them, these golden “efficient governors”, that’s the first thing. Derzhavin, an honest man, was the governor of Tambov. He fought against bribery and theft, and for this the local elite, together with his neighbors, almost drove him out of the world, and Catherine II dismissed him from office.

True, she later made him her secretary of state. She generally considered Derzhavin a simpleton and an obsessive bore. God-like Felitsa was strict with him. And secondly, under Stalin we had the best Constitution in the world - so what? Did this Constitution include articles about the Gulag and slavery?

Honestly, you can’t please Russia. They came up with the slogan that the people are always right, but the people to this day glorify Stalin and want to be flogged again.

Eh, if Alexander I had known how things would go in his fatherland in a hundred years, he would have reproached himself and despaired less. Officials hated Speransky somehow especially fiercely; exams, you see, you have to pass exams for the position! We can say that Wigel spoke on behalf of the officials. Here are some quotes: “This hateful name appears for the first time in these notes. This man quickly emerged from insignificance”; “He did not like the nobility, whose contempt he felt for his previous state; he did not like religion, whose rules constrained his actions and opposed his extensive plans; he did not like monarchical rule, which blocked his path to the very heights; he did not love his fatherland, because he considered it insufficiently enlightened and unworthy of it.”

With all this, Wigel paid tribute to Speransky’s intelligence and talent: “I shared everyone’s respect for him; but even then, near him, it seemed to me that I heard the smell of sulfur and in his blue eyes I saw the bluish flame of the underworld.”

A serious intrigue swirled around Speransky at court. Significant letters were sent both to the reformers themselves and to the Tsar personally. The mainspring of the intrigue was the head of the commission on Finnish affairs, Baron Armfelt; he believed that Speransky paid too little attention to his Finland.

Armfelt enjoyed the king's favor and had big plans for his own career. Armfelt was friendly with the Minister of Police Balashov, who openly suspected Speransky of treason. A flock of informants worked for the police, reporting what and where Speransky said about the existing law and order in Russia. All denunciations went to the king's table. A manuscript passed from hand to hand, proving that Speransky’s only task was to destroy the foundations of the state in favor of Napoleon.

And Speransky simply could not stop the financial disorder in the country. His hands were tied by the continental blockade, and it was not his fault.

In the end, Alexander got tired of all this - everyone is indignant, even Karamzin, a patriot and a smart girl, is against the transformer, and Russia is on the verge of war. A two-hour conversation took place between the king and his brilliant official; the conversation was difficult. They said that after him the sovereign cried. The next day, the Tsar told Prince Golovkin: “... Speransky was taken away from me last night, and he was my right hand.”

The convert was unable to defend himself, and Alexander was forced to tell him that, in view of the enemy’s approach to the borders of Russia, he was not able to verify all the accusations brought against Speransky, so he must resign.

But actually, there is some mystery in all this.

Some serious crack split the relationship between Alexander and the converter. The king did not always listen to public opinion, he would have neglected him this time too, but... there was resentment there.

And it was Alexander who was offended; it was not Speransky’s rank to be offended, and he had no time for that, he was too devoted to his science. Speransky's resignation thundered across the country. M.A. Dmitriev in his book “Chapters and Memoirs of My Life” writes: “... the fall of Speransky caused a lot of noise in the boarding house.

Everyone who went home brought different news. Most of them were of the opinion that Speransky betrayed Russia and handed himself over to Napoleon.” But the tsar later defended his secretary of state (he returned to business in 1816). Alexander’s words about Speransky are known: “He never betrayed Russia, he betrayed me personally.”

On March 17, 1812, Speransky was dismissed from all positions and exiled to live in Nizhny Novgorod. There were two and a half months left before the war.

Speransky's reforms.

Alexander I wished Russia liberal reforms. For this purpose, a “secret committee” was created, and Mikhail Mikhailovich Speransky became the emperor’s main assistant.

M. M. Speransky- the son of a village priest, who became the emperor's secretary without patronage, had many talents. He read a lot and knew foreign languages.

On behalf of the emperor, Speransky developed a project of reforms designed to change the management system in Russia.

Speransky's reform project.

M. Speransky suggested the following changes:

introduce the principle of separation of powers into legislative, executive and judicial;
introduce three levels of local self-government: volost, district (district) and provincial
allow all land owners to participate in the elections, including state peasants (45% of the total)

The election of the State Duma was for the first time assumed to be based on suffrage - multi-stage, unequal for nobles and peasants, but broad.

M. Speransky's reform did not give the State Duma broad powers: all projects were discussed, approved by the Duma, they would come into force only after the tsar's permission.

The tsar and the government, as executive power, were deprived of the right to make laws at their own discretion.

Assessment of M. Speransky's reforms.

If the project of state reform of Russia by M. Speransky had been translated into action, it would have made our country a constitutional monarchy, and not an absolute one.

To become liberal, a country would need to free the peasants from dependence. N. M. Speransky planned to change the constitutional structure of the state without freeing 55% of the peasantry from serfdom.

Draft of a new Russian Civil Code.

M. Speransky dealt with this project in the same way as the first: without taking into account the real situation in the state.

The activist drew up new laws based on the philosophical works of the West, but in practice many of these principles simply did not work.

Many articles of this project are copies of the Napoleonic Code, which caused outrage in Russian society.

M. Speransky issued a decree changing the rules for assigning ranks, tried to fight the budget deficit that was devastated by wars, and participated in the development of the customs tariff in 1810.

The end of reforms.

Opposition to the reformer both at the top and at the bottom dictated to Alexander I the decision to remove M. Speransky from all positions and exile him to Perm.

So in March 1812 his political activity was interrupted.

In 1819, M. Speransky was appointed Governor-General of Siberia, and in 1821 he returned to St. Petersburg and became a member of the established State Council.

MM. Speransky

In December 1808, Speransky, on behalf of Alexander I, began developing the “Plan for the State Transformation of Russia.”

He began work on the project not only with his usual energy, but also with the hope of its implementation.

All the accumulated materials were transferred to the reformer " Secret Committee", notes and projects received by the Commission for the Drafting of State Laws.

By that time, he said, he had “studied all the existing constitutions in the world” and discussed every paragraph of the plan with the emperor every day.

Main provisions of the “Plan”

Essentially, the “Plan for the State Transformation of Russia” was a constitution with its fixed and unchangeable laws. This was an immutable condition for Speransky, and he himself spoke about it this way: “In any well-organized state there must be positive, constant, immutable, immutable principles of legislation, with which all other laws could be consistent.”

Speransky was a staunch supporter of the constitutional system.

But at the same time, he understood that Russia was not ready for a constitutional system, and therefore transformations should begin with the reorganization of the state apparatus. In the period from 1808 to 1811, he drew up a plan for state transformation from the emperor's office to the volost government.

A huge amount of work was carried out, and in a very short time frame for such a scale.

According to Speransky’s “Plan”, the entire population was divided into classes:

nobility as owners of real estate
average condition (burghers, merchants, state peasants
working people (servants, artisans, townspeople, day laborers).

The division was carried out in accordance with political and civil rights: all three classes had civil rights, and only those who owned real estate had political rights.

But a transition from one state to another was envisaged. The presence of civil rights means that there is a certain degree of freedom in the state. But to guarantee it, Speransky believed, a political constitution is necessary.

Vladimir set of laws Russian Empire

He argues that the state must ensure a person’s safety and the safety of his property, because

integrity is the essence of civil rights and liberties. These rights and freedoms have two types: personal freedoms and material freedoms.

No one can be punished without a trial.
No one is required to send personal service, otherwise than by law.

Anyone can dispose of their property at will, in accordance with the general law.
No one is obliged to pay taxes and duties except by law, and not by arbitrariness.

As we see, Speransky perceives the law as a method of protection, and this requires guarantees against the arbitrariness of the legislator.

Therefore, a constitutional and legal limitation of power is necessary. Therefore, the basis of Speransky’s plan of state reforms was requirement to strengthen the civil order.

The idea of separation of powers

The idea of separation of powers was to be the basis of the country's government and exist as legislative, executive and judicial powers.

Speransky borrowed this idea from the West. He said: “It is impossible to base government on the law if one sovereign power draws up the law and carries it out.”

Senate should have become the highest authority judiciary.

Ministries– executive. State Duma – legislative.

Above all these bodies, the State Council was established as an advisory body under the emperor, which finally approved or rejected the project submitted for consideration, even if it was adopted by the Duma.

The essence of the constitution was as follows:

1) Separation of powers.

2) The opinions of the legislature are absolutely free and accurately reflect the aspirations of the people.

3) The judiciary is independent of the executive.

4) The executive branch is responsible to the legislative branch.

As we see, the main ideas of the “Plan for the State Transformation of Russia” were quite radical, but the soil of Russian reality at that time was not yet ready to accept them.

Alexander I was satisfied with only partial reforms of Russia, covered with liberal promises and general discussions about law and freedom. But he experienced strong pressure from his court circles, who sought to prevent radical changes in Russia.

The house in St. Petersburg in which M.M. died.

Speransky

On January 1, 1810, the creation of the State Council was announced, and M. M. Speransky received the position of Secretary of State in it. All documentation passing through the State Council was under his jurisdiction. The creation of the State Council was the first stage of transformation: it was he who was supposed to establish plans for further reforms, all bills had to pass through the State Council.

The general meeting of the State Council was chaired by the sovereign himself. He 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 N.P. Rumyantsev. The Secretary of State (Speransky) became the head of the State Chancellery.

Other reforms

A decree on court titles was issued, which changed the procedure for obtaining titles and privileges. Now these ranks were to be considered as simple insignia. Only those who performed public service received privileges. The decree on reforming the procedure for obtaining court ranks was signed by the emperor, but everyone understood that its author was Speransky. In Russia, for many decades, children of noble families from birth received the court ranks of chamber cadet (5th class), and after some time chamberlain (4th class).

Having become adults, without having served anywhere, they automatically received “higher places.” And by Speransky’s decree, chamber cadets and chamberlains not in active service were ordered to find a place of service within two months, otherwise they would face resignation.

In addition, he created a plan for changing the order of promotion to ranks, which has been in effect since the era of Peter I. Speransky directly speaks about the harm of Peter’s “Table of Ranks” and proposes to abolish or regulate the receipt of ranks, starting from the 6th grade, by having a university diploma.

The program included 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 and above, officials had significant privileges and high salaries. There were many who wanted to get it, but most were unable to pass the exams. It is clear why Speransky began to be hated more and more.

In 1810-1811 Speransky reorganized the ministries: they were divided into departments, departments into branches. A council of ministers was formed from the highest officials of the ministry, and a committee of ministers was formed from all ministers to discuss administrative affairs.

By the beginning of 1811

Speransky proposed a project to transform the Senate. He intended to divide the Senate into government and judicial, but then this project was postponed. But according to his plan, the Tsarskoye Selo Lyceum was established in 1810.

Speransky at the monument to the 1000th anniversary of Russia in Veliky Novgorod

All aspects of Russian reality were reflected in the “Russian Transformation Plan”. Regarding serfdom, Speransky wrote: “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 different 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.”

Speransky's plan for the transition from autocracy to a constitutional monarchy remained unfulfilled.

Work on the plan for state reforms was completed by Speransky by October 1809, receiving the title “Introduction to the Code of State Laws”*. The main provisions and ideas of the plan were previously discussed during numerous conversations between Alexander 1 and Speransky.

In August 1809, the Senate adopted a Decree on new rules for promotion to civil service ranks. The Decree established that the main principle for promotion up the career ladder was not length of service, but “real merit and excellent knowledge.”

Moreover, only officials who completed a course of study at one of the Russian universities or passed an exam under a special program could have the right to apply for the rank of collegiate assessor (8th grade) and state councilor (5th - 6th grades).

Speransky had the idea of creating a special closed lyceum near St. Petersburg for a limited number of noble children of noble families, where they would receive the most better education, for further service in central institutions.

In 1811, the first 30 students began classes at the Tsarskoye Selo Lyceum.

Speransky saw the goal of transforming the socio-political system of Russia in giving the autocracy the external form of a constitutional monarchy based on the force of law. The law was supposed to determine the basic principles of the structure and functioning of state power.

Speransky, in accordance with the principle of C. Montesquieu, proposed dividing the system of power into 3 parts: legislative, executive and judicial. The creation of relevant bodies was envisaged. managing them. Legislative issues would be under the jurisdiction of the State Duma, the courts - under the jurisdiction of the Senate, and state administration - under the jurisdiction of ministries responsible to the Duma.

The legislative series was formed by dumas - volost, district, provincial and state, the volost duma was supposed to consist of land owners of the volost and deputies from state-owned peasants (but one out of 500 souls) and elected the volost government and deputies to the district duma, which, in turn , elected the district government and deputies to the provincial Duma, and the provincial Duma elected the provincial government and deputies to the State Duma.

The executive power is the boards - volost, district and provincial - elected by local dumas, and the highest executive power - ministers - is appointed by the sovereign.

According to Speransky’s project, the Senate, embodying the “supreme court” of the empire, had the right to make final verdicts.

Judges were responsible solely to the law. The judicial power, according to Speransky's proposal, is formed by volost courts (arbitration or magistrates), then district and provincial courts, consisting of elected judges and operating with the participation of juries; The highest court is represented by the Senate, whose members are elected (for life) by the State Duma and approved by the emperor.

Representatives of the lower classes were granted only so-called general civil rights: no one can be punished without trial; no one is obliged to perform personal service at the discretion of another person; anyone can acquire property and dispose of it according to law; no one is obliged to perform natural duties at the will of another, but only by law or by voluntary consent.

The middle class was supposed to have, in addition to general civil rights (subject to a certain property qualification), also political rights.

And finally, the nobility, along with general civil and political rights, had special, so-called special civil rights (rights of exemption from regular service, ownership of populated estates). The preservation of certain privileges of the nobility should, according to Speransky, facilitate the very process of transition to a civil, legal society.

To combine the functions of different parts government controlled Speransky proposed creating a special body - the State Council.

Alexander 1 generally approved of Speransky’s plan and intended to print its implementation from 1810.

On January 1, 1810, the State Council was formed (which could become the upper house of the future Russian parliament). Within a year, the State Duma (lower, elected chamber), as well as district and provincial dumas, were to be formed.

Speransky's reforms.

But this second part of the plan was not destined to come true.

Following the creation of the State Council, a transformation of the ministries was carried out: instead of the previously existing 8 ministries there should have been 1 1. On the initiative of Speransky in 181 1.

was developed General position about ministries, which determined the uniformity of organizations and ministries, the system of relationships structural divisions and ministries with other institutions.

When developing the General Establishment of Ministries, not only the first experience of the ministries created in 1802 was used, but also samples of the organization, record keeping and activities of the ministries of France.

The project for transforming the Senate, prepared by Speransky and already approved by Alexander, which provided for the separation of its judicial function from the administrative one with the creation of two Senates - government and judicial - was never put into effect.

In March 1812

The emperor announced to Speransky that, in view of the approach of the enemy to the borders of the state, it was impossible to verify all the accusations brought against him. and Speransky was exiled first to Nizhny Novgorod, and then to Perm. In 1819, Alexander 1 appointed him governor-general of Siberia, recognizing the injustice of the accusations previously brought against him.

Speransky was returned to St. Petersburg and appointed a member of the State Council and the Siberian Committee, managing the Commission for drafting laws. Speransky was a member of the Supreme Criminal Court of the Decembrists.

In 1826, Speransky actually headed the 2nd department of His Imperial Majesty's Own Chancellery, which codified laws. Under his leadership, the first Complete Collection of Laws of the Russian Empire in 45 volumes (1830) and the Code of Laws of the Russian Empire in 15 volumes (1832) were prepared.

The successful implementation of the enormous work of systematizing and codifying Russian legislation will be called by Speransky’s biographers his main merit.

The codification of laws made it possible to significantly streamline public administration, strengthening the principles of legality in it.

After Speransky’s death, Modest Korf, his biographer, wrote in his diary: “The luminary of the Russian administration has faded!”

Speransky's reforms

I find two conditions in Russia: slaves of the sovereign and slaves of the landowners. The first are called free only in relation to the second; In fact, there are no free people in Russia except beggars and philosophers.

Mikhail Speransky

The reign of Alexander 1 was marked by numerous reforms that affected almost all aspects of the state.

One of the inspirers of changes in Russia at that time was Mikhail Speransky, who proposed to radically reform the political structure of the country, organizing its authorities according to the principle of separation of branches of power. These ideas are known today as Speransky’s reforms, which will be briefly discussed by us in this material. The reforms themselves were carried out in the period from 1802 to 1812 and had great importance for Russia at that time.

The main provisions of Speransky’s reform project

Speransky's reforms are usually divided into three stages: 1802-1807, 1808-1810, 1811-1812.

Let's look at each stage in more detail.

First stage (1802-1807)

As a result, the collegiums, which were created under Peter 1, were liquidated, then abolished by Catherine, however, during the years of Paul 1 they again resumed their activities as the main state bodies under the emperor. After 1802, ministries were created instead of collegiums. To coordinate the work of the Ministries, the Cabinet of Ministers was created. In addition to these transformations, Speransky published a number of reports on the role of law in the life of the state and the need for competent distribution of responsibilities among government agencies.

These studies became the basis for the next stages of Speransky's reforms.

Second stage (1808-1810)

After increasing confidence on the part of the emperor and being appointed to important government positions, Speransky prepared in 1809 one of the most important documents in its political career- “Introduction to the Code of State Laws.”

This was a plan for reform of the Russian Empire. Historians note the following key provisions of this document as a system that quite clearly characterizes Speransky’s reforms:

At the core political power states.
Division of branches into legislative, executive and judicial. Speransky drew this idea from the ideas of the French Enlightenment, in particular Montesquieu. Legislative power was to be exercised by the State Duma, executive power by the already created Ministries, and judicial power by the Senate.
Creation of an advisory body under the emperor, the State Council.
This body was supposed to prepare draft laws, which would then be submitted to the Duma, where, after voting, they could become laws.
Social transformations.
The reform proposed dividing Russian society into three classes: the first – the nobility, the second (“middle class”) – merchants, townspeople and state peasants, the third – the “working people”.
Implementation of the idea of “natural law”. Civil rights (the right to life, arrest only by court order, etc.) for all three classes, and political rights were supposed to belong only to the “free people,” that is, the first two classes.
Social mobility was allowed. With the accumulation of capital, serfs could redeem themselves, and therefore become the second estate, and therefore gain political rights.
The State Duma is an elected body. The elections were to be held in 4 stages, thereby creating regional authorities.
First of all, the two classes elected the volost duma, whose members elected the district duma, whose deputies, in turn, formed the provincial duma with their votes.

Deputies at the provincial level elected the State Duma.
Leadership of the Duma passed to the Chancellor appointed by the Emperor.

After the publication of this project, Speransky, together with the Emperor, began to implement the ideas. On January 1, 1810, an advisory body was organized - the State Council.

Mikhail Speransky himself was appointed its head. In theory, this body was supposed to become a temporary legislative body until the Duma was formed. The Council also had to manage the finances of the empire.

Third stage (1811-1812)

Despite the incomplete implementation of the first stage of reforms, Speransky published the “Code of the Governing Senate” in 1811.

This document proposed:

He proposed dividing the Senate into the Governing Senate (issues of local government) and the Judicial Senate (the main body of the judicial branch of government of the Russian Empire).
Create a vertical of judicial power. Provincial, district and volost courts should be created.
He expressed the idea of granting civil rights to serfs.

This project, like the first document of 1809, remained just a project. At the time of 1812, only one idea of Speransky was realized - the creation of the State Council.

Why did Alexander 1 never decide to implement Speransky’s project?

Speransky began to be criticized back in 1809 after the publication of “Introduction to the Code of State Laws.” Alexander 1 perceived Speransky’s criticism as his own.

In addition, since Speransky's reforms were based largely on the ideas of the French Enlightenment, he was criticized for trying to "flirt" with Napoleon. As a result, a group of influential conservative-minded nobility formed in the Russian Empire, which criticized the emperor for trying to “destroy the historical foundations” of the Russian state. One of the most famous critics of Speransky, his contemporary, the famous historian Karamzin. Most of all, the nobility was outraged by the desire to give political rights to state peasants, as well as the idea of giving civil rights to all classes of the empire, including serfs.

Speransky took part in the financial reform. As a result, the taxes that the nobles had to pay would increase.

Political activities of Speransky

This fact also turned the nobility against the head of the State Council.

Thus, we can note the main reasons why the implementation of Speransky’s project was not carried out:

Huge resistance from the Russian nobility.
Not the determination of the emperor himself in carrying out reforms.
The emperor’s reluctance to form a system of “three powers”, since this significantly limited the role of the emperor himself in the country.
A possible war with Napoleonic France, which, however, only suspended the reforms if there were no other reasons for stopping them completely.

Reasons and consequences of Speransky's resignation

However, the emperor did not accept the resignation. Since 1811, the number of denunciations against Speransky has also increased. He was accused of many crimes: slandering the emperor, secret negotiations with Napoleon, attempted coup d'état and other vile acts. Despite these statements, the emperor awarded Speransky the Order of Alexander Nevsky. However, with the spread of rumors and criticism of Speransky, a shadow fell on the emperor himself.

As a result, in March 1812, Alexander signed a decree removing Speransky from his duties as a civil servant. Thus, Speransky’s state reforms were stopped.

In 1814, he was allowed to return to his estate in the Novgorod province, but only under political supervision. Since 1816, Mikhail Speransky even returned to public service, becoming the Governor of Penza, and in 1819 he became the Governor-General of Siberia.

In 1821, he was appointed head of the commission for drafting laws, for which he received a state award during the years of Nicholas I. In 1839 he died of a cold, before his death he was included in the list of count families of the Russian Empire.

The main result of Speransky’s activities

Despite the fact that Speransky’s reforms were never implemented, they continued to be discussed in Russian society even after the death of the reformer. In 1864, when carrying out judicial reform, Speransky’s ideas regarding the vertical of the judicial system were taken into account. In 1906, the first State Duma in the history of Russia was established.

Therefore, despite its incompleteness, Speransky’s project had a huge impact on the political life of Russian society.

Speransky's personality

The latter became the prosecutor general under Pavel 1 a year later. This is how the political career of Mikhail Speransky began. In 1801-1802, he met P. Kochubey and began to take part in the work of the “Unofficial Committee” under Alexander 1, for the first time revealing a penchant for reform.

For his contribution to the work of the “committee” in 1806 he received the Order of St. Vladimir, 3rd degree. Thanks to his reports on legal topics, he has established himself as an excellent expert in jurisprudence, as well as an expert in the field of state theory. It was then that the emperor began to systematize Speransky’s reforms in order to use them to change Russia.

After the signing of the Peace of Tilsit in 1807, the “Unofficial Committee” opposed the truce with France.

Speransky himself supported Alexander’s actions, and also expressed interest in the reforms of Napoleon Bonaparte. In this regard, the emperor removes the “Secret Committee” from its activities.

Thus begins the rise of Mikhail Speransky as a reformer of the Russian Empire.

In 1808 he became Deputy Minister of Justice, and in 1810 the main appointment of his life took place: he became Secretary of State of the State Council, the second person in the country after the Emperor. In addition, from 1808 to 1811 Speransky was Chief Prosecutor of the Senate.

The Russian nineteenth century flashed a whole galaxy of outstanding personalities not only in literature, art, science, but also in the sphere of government activity. Among the latter, M. M. Speransky was considered a star of the first magnitude. One of the main biographers of the reformer, researcher of the 19th century. Modest Korf calls Speransky nothing less than “the luminary of the Russian administration.” However, there were other opinions among contemporaries. Speransky was called both a “huge bureaucrat”, a “doctrinaire”, and a “bureaucrat”. Nevertheless, the authors of these characteristics recognized Speransky’s extraordinary talent as a statesman.

Speransky was the best, most gifted representative of the old, spiritual and academic education. By the nature of this 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 disdaining simple everyday phenomena, or, in philosophical jargon, concrete, empirical facts of life. Speransky had not only a philosophical, but also an unusually strong mind, of which there are always few, and in that philosophical age there were fewer than ever. Hard work on abstractions imparted 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.

Speransky was the first in Russia to begin a systematic substantiation of liberalism: he developed not only issues of current politics, but also problems of a general political nature.

Speransky recognized that autocracy is historical form board, i.e. having its own beginning and end. In this regard, he took a step forward compared to his contemporaries, including such famous historians as V.N. Tatishchev and N.M. Karamzin, who considered autocracy to be the original and eternal form of power in Russia. Speaking about the origin of the state, Speransky does not take the point of view of Rousseau about the happy life of people in the state of nature, but the point of view of Hobbes, who saw in the state of nature a war of all against all. Speransky views the emergence of the state as a result of the development of property. He believes that the state is a social union that arose to provide “everyone with their own.” The state is built on: 1) mutual recognition of independence; 2) property. The state is a union of benefits. The idea of public benefit can be seen in all of Speransky’s works. Benefit is the source of law: “Taxes are collected not by right, but by necessity and benefit; take away the necessity and then the taxes will be unfair.”

He proclaims property and trade to be the most powerful driving forces of society. Property owners entrusted their rights to the sovereign. At first, his power was characterized by “an air of moderation” and “prudence.” However, “as the reasons that limited power by time and habit weakened, as large immovable estates fragmented and became smaller, the supreme power expanded and drew closer to autocracy.” This was contrary to the “spirit of the times,” since “movable property” was increasing, “out of the first age of acquisition and entering the age of preservation: From this, important changes followed in the very manner of acquisition. Capital appeared, that is, people who wanted to give to movable property all the properties of immovable property through loans. trading enterprises have become more complex and extensive. Everyone felt the need for a loan and guarantee.

The autocracy could not provide them with either one or the other. On the contrary, with sharp examples it showed what should be expected from it where these examples affected movable and immovable property together, where these two forces united, overthrew the autocracy and restored the former order of things - the constitution." Speransky, unlike some Russian enlighteners, recognized the feudal nature of autocracy. However, he understood feudalism only as a system of legal norms, as a certain form of state power.

Speransky believed that as historical development progressed, the autocracy ceased to respond to the “spirit of the times” and deprived people of their natural state - civil freedom. This state of affairs could not satisfy the growing bourgeoisie, whose interests were intertwined with the interests of landowners, and then a “revolutionary explosion” occurred, restoring the constitution.

Speransky argues that history is a process of development of freedom. At times this development may be interrupted by various circumstances, but since freedom is a natural state, a return to it is inevitable.

Speransky defines the concept of freedom in a moral sense and as a source of law. Moral freedom is an “inalienable part of the property” of every person, as a “gift of God.” Consequently, freedom is eternal, and therefore “whoever deprives a person of free will deprives him of his personality, turns spirit into matter, and encroaches on the gift of God.” A person can be deprived of freedom, but only for a while, because in each individual the “amount of freedom” is naturally inherent in the same amount. Consequently, freedom and equality of people are inseparable for Speransky.

The meaning of moral freedom lies in the possibility of choice. “A person can say to himself: I want to be happy now, although I know that I will be unhappy later; there is a choice, therefore there remains freedom.”

Thus, in autocracy Speransky sees an independent force that is opposed by all classes. Eliminate autocracy - and law and freedom will immediately triumph. Moreover, since autocracy independent force, then it can eliminate itself, without serious obstacles from society. This is one of Speransky’s fundamental theses. He insisted on it even when life in practice refuted it. Speransky seeks to show that property, from its very inception, developed on the basis of the natural right of any person to own a thing. But property cannot in any way be extended to the possession of the person of another person, since this is contrary to natural law. “Persons can have duties towards us,” he wrote, we can have power over them, but they cannot be our property and we cannot own them as things.” Consequently, serfdom was a violation of the natural state of man; in his opinion, it was negative side autocracy.

Speransky proceeded from the fact that any legislation must take into account the interests of private property. The state cannot make laws for itself. “It is impossible to imagine a state without ordinary people and, therefore, to imagine laws useful to the state and useless for private individuals. True, there is private property and there is state property, but in this respect private laws should also be contrasted with the laws of state economy, and not laws in general, not belonging to private property." Speransky here advocates equality in property rights, without making exceptions even for the sake of the state. In another work, he directly states: “The laws of private property are laws common to all subjects.”

The concept of property is defined by Speransky somewhat abstractly. Everyone has it, since “a person’s true property is his strength.” This idea is interesting because in a hidden form it carries within itself the denial of the right of ownership of one person over another, for the right of ownership consists in the exclusion by the owner of any other person from using the object. But it is impossible to deprive a person of his personal powers, therefore, the property of one person over another is also impossible.

Thus, Speransky’s views have a pronounced bourgeois orientation and are based on two fundamental ideas - property and freedom.

Speransky was capable of surprisingly correct political structures, but at that time he had difficulty understanding reality, that is, history. Having begun to draw up a general plan for state reforms, he looked at our fatherland as if it were a large slate on which one could draw any mathematically correct state structures. He drew such a plan, characterized by amazing harmony and consistency in the implementation of the accepted principles. But when it became necessary to implement this plan, neither the sovereign nor the minister could in any way adjust it to the level of the actual needs and available resources of Russia.

Realizing that the success of the planned transformations in the Russian Empire would be largely connected with the bureaucratic machine, Speransky developed projects for its improvement. Faced with dozens, if not hundreds, of business papers every day, he had the opportunity to determine the level of preparation Russian officials. And being one of them himself, he perfectly understood the importance of the “bureaucratic army” for future reforms and therefore sought to make it highly organized and efficient.

Two particular measures, which had an internal connection with the reforms being prepared, indicated what people were required for the new government institutions. On April 3, 1809, a decree on court ranks was issued. He changed the order introduced during the reign of Catherine II, according to which nobles, even those who were not in public service, received the rank of chamber cadet or chamberlain, and, consequently, certain privileges. From now on, these titles were to be considered as simple distinctions that did not provide any privileges. Only those who performed public service received privileges. The decree was signed by the emperor, but it was no secret to anyone who its actual author was.

The second measure was the Decree published on August 6, 1809 on new rules for promotion to civil service ranks, secretly prepared by Speransky. One can only imagine how many ill-wishers and enemies Mikhail Mikhailovich acquired thanks to this one decree. 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 of a course of study at one of the Russian universities or who had passed exams under a special program. This program included 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. In addition, the 8th rank gave the right to hereditary nobility. 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 unable to pass the exams. It is quite understandable that these unexpected transformations by Speransky, aimed at strengthening state power, were met with hostility by part of the nobility and bureaucrats. Hatred towards the new reformer began to increase.

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 that passed through the State Council: he prepared papers for meetings, compiled reports and reports to present them to the emperor.

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. As already noted, this role was intended for them in the State Duma. But since the creation of the State Council was considered as the first stage of transformation and it was he who was supposed to establish plans for further reforms, at first this body was given broad powers. At the same time, however, it was established that the decisions of the Council come into force only after their approval by the sovereign. At the same time, if, according to the reform plan, the State Council was supposed to coordinate the activities of all other government bodies, now it also received legislative functions, because the desired system of government bodies simply did not exist yet and had to be created.

From now on, all bills had to pass through the State Council and be discussed at its general meeting. The general meeting was composed of members of four departments: 1) legislative, 2) military affairs, 3) civil and spiritual affairs, 4) state economics; and from ministers. It was presided over by the sovereign himself or special person, assigned to them. At the same time, it is stipulated that the tsar could only approve the opinion of the majority of the general meeting. This is evidenced by the fact that only the opinion of the majority was included in the “Journal” of the State Council, and the opinion of the minority and any other statements acted as appendices.

Thus, the emergence of the State Council meant the creation of an institution that had legislative and unifying significance and consisted of appointed rather than elected persons. This was largely consistent with the spirit of Speransky’s plans and was Russia’s further step towards strengthening the legal order, as well as the implementation of liberal principles.

In the summer of 1810, on the initiative of Speransky, a reorganization of ministries began, which was completed by June 1811. During it, the Ministry of Commerce was liquidated, the affairs of which were distributed between the Ministries of Finance and Internal Affairs. Cases of internal security were separated from the latter’s jurisdiction, for which a special Ministry of Police was formed. In addition, several special departments were established, with significance close to individual ministries - state control, spiritual affairs of foreign faiths and communications. 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. At the same time, the law began to clearly define the limits of the power of ministers and their responsibilities.

By the beginning of 1811, Speransky proposed and new project transformation of the Senate. The essence of this project was significantly different from what was originally planned. This time, Speransky wrote that it was necessary to strictly separate administrative and judicial matters of the Senate, which were mixed in its structure. According to this, 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. In the duality of the composition, the spark of those ideas on which Speransky’s general transformative plan was built especially flashed. Speransky proposed the principle of election when creating the judiciary. In his opinion, volost, district and provincial courts should be elected. However, the highest judicial authority - the judicial Senate (which at the same time remained an administrative institution) must be appointed by the sovereign for life from among the representatives elected in the provincial dumas.

Speransky's electoral system was based not on the class (feudal) principle, but on the property qualification (ownership of movable and immovable property), which indicated the persistence of inequality between classes. The entire population of Russia was divided into the following three categories: the nobility, which had all civil and political rights; people of “average status” (merchants, townspeople, state peasants), who had only civil rights - property, freedom of occupation and movement, the right to speak on their own behalf in court, and “working people” - landowner peasants, servants, workers and households who have no rights. Only representatives of the first two categories could enjoy the right to vote. Thus, only two classes received basic political rights.

For the third estate - the "working people" - the reformer's project provided some civil rights while maintaining the serfdom. Speransky believed that serfdom would be abolished gradually, through the development of industry, trade and education, since “there is no example in history that an enlightened and commercial people could remain in slavery for a long time.” While preserving the existence of classes, Speransky's project weakened class barriers, providing for a wider possibility of transition from the "middle state" to the nobility through seniority, and from the "working people" to the "middle state" through the acquisition of private property.

This project aroused sharp objections in the State Council, whose members saw the right of election by the nobility of the Senate as a limitation of autocratic power. And, despite the fact that when voting, most of the council members spoke “in favor of the project”, and the sovereign approved the opinion of the majority, the reform was never carried out. Due to various internal and external reasons, the Senate remained in its previous state, and Speransky himself ultimately came to the conclusion that the project should be postponed.

As for the creation of the State Duma, it seems that there was no talk of it in 1810-1811. Thus, almost from the very beginning of the reforms, a deviation from their original plan was discovered. Of the three branches of government - legislative, executive and judicial - only the first two were reformed; the third was not affected by the reform. The project to create a “Code of Civil Laws” has also been delayed. Speransky began to understand the impracticability of his far-reaching plans and in February 1811 he turned to Alexander I with a request for resignation.

I find two conditions in Russia: slaves of the sovereign and slaves of the landowners. The first are called free only in relation to the second; In fact, there are no free people in Russia except beggars and philosophers.

The reign of Alexander 1 was marked by numerous reforms that affected almost all aspects of the state. One of the inspirers of changes in Russia at that time was Mikhail Speransky, who proposed to radically reform the political structure of the country, organizing its authorities according to the principle of separation of branches of power. These ideas are known today as Speransky’s reforms, which we will briefly discuss in this material. The reforms themselves were carried out from 1802 to 1812 and were of great importance for Russia at that time.