At the beginning of his reign, Alexander I expressed the idea that the state urgently needed radical changes. The emperor's personal friend Count Stroganov put forward a proposal on this matter that the administration should initially be reformed. As a result, in May 1801, he presented the emperor with a project in which he recommended the creation of a secret committee to develop and discuss a plan of change. Ultimately, Alexander I approved the creation of this body. In fact, a secret committee is a state advisory institution of an unofficial nature. At the direction of the autocrat, the body included Count Stroganov himself, as well as Kochubey, Czartoryski and Novosiltsev, who were especially close to the emperor.

Committee tasks

It is worth first dispelling one myth concerning some orders of the secret committee. When the Tsar approved its composition, only Count Stroganov was in St. Petersburg. In view of this, the start of the organ's work was temporarily postponed. Therefore, to say that Alexander I approved a number of orders of that time with the help of the newly formed committee would be erroneous. He carried out all the new instructions of that period, as well as the cancellation of some orders, together with the count, without the participation of the newly created body. When the first meeting of the committee was held, a plan for its work was immediately determined, as well as tasks that it was supposed to carry out. This plan included the following points:

Determination of the actual state of affairs;

Carrying out reforms in the government mechanism;

Ensuring the independence of updated government agencies.

It is worth noting that it was Stroganov who considered these tasks a priority. The Emperor at this time was concerned about the issue of creating some kind of demonstrative declaration (for example, such as the Declaration of Human and Civil Rights).

Novosiltsev's plan

Novosiltsev, in turn, proposed a different reform program. It included the following questions:

1. On the protection of the state, both from the sea and from the land.

2. On the formation of possible relations with other countries.

3. Resolving the issue of the internal statistical and administrative state of the country. Moreover, the statistical state did not mean the study of the problems of the people, but the establishment of industry, the establishment of trade routes and the issue of agriculture. He classified the solution of financial and legislative issues, as well as problems of justice, as administrative. Moreover, it was precisely these issues that he assigned paramount importance.

Discussion of Novosiltsev's plan

To implement the first point of the plan, a special commission was created, which included competent people in the naval sphere. Some difficulties arose with the implementation of the second section. This was due to the fact that Alexander’s absolute ignorance of the state’s foreign policy matters was revealed. However, Czartoryski and Kochubey, competent in such matters, had certain views on this matter. However, difficulties arose here too, since the emperor expressed the idea that special attention should be paid to drawing up a coalition against England. Moreover, such a proposal caused a storm of bewilderment among the committee members, since shortly before this Alexander signed a friendly convention with this country. This made it possible to extremely successfully resolve the most controversial issues regarding maritime rights. To cool the autocrat's ardor a little, members of the committee advised him to consult on this issue with old, experienced diplomats. Moreover, they persistently recommended the candidacy of A. R. Vorontsov.

Internal reforms

The secret committee paid special attention to the country's internal relations during subsequent meetings. This was due to the fact that resolving these particular issues was considered the highest priority. As for the emperor, he was primarily concerned about two main points. This, as mentioned above, is the creation of a special declaration on the protection of rights, as well as the issue of reforming the Senate. It was in his person that the emperor saw the defender of the integrity of citizens.

Project "Commitment to the People"

Another development, to which Alexander paid special attention, was drawn up by Vorontsov and had nothing to do with the changes in the Senate. However, this project concerned internal changes and responded to the emperor’s wishes to create a special declaration. Special acts were developed that were extremely similar in appearance to Catherine’s letters of grant, but with one significant difference. From the content it followed that serious guarantees of the freedom of citizens extended to all segments of the population.

The solution to the peasant question

For the first time, the improvement committee raised this issue when discussing the “charter to the people.” Moreover, this problem was raised for a reason. In the issue of the “letter”, the point about the possibility of peasants owning their own real estate was especially noted. It is worth noting that at that time, according to the autocrat, this was a rather dangerous right. However, after the coronation (which took place in November 1801), under the influence of Laharpe and Admiral Mordvinov (they declared the need to take some action in favor of the peasants), Alexander retreated a little from his beliefs. For example, Mordvinov proposed extending the right to own real estate to state-owned peasants, townspeople and merchants. Committee members did not rule out the possibility that over time they would be able to come to a consensus on the abolition of serfdom. However, with the caveat that the decision this issue must take place gradually and slowly, since the path of action remained completely unclear. The secret committee never actually investigated issues related to trade, agriculture and industry. Although it should be noted that their condition at that time required special attention.

Central government reforms

The secret committee's most important task was to resolve issues related to the transformation of central government bodies. Moreover, these changes began during the reign of Catherine - she managed to transform local institutions. However, the turn never reached the central ones. The only thing she managed to do was abolish the bulk of the collegiums. As can be seen from history, even during her reign there was great confusion in carrying out these reforms. That is why the committee members decided that the transformation of central government bodies was a priority issue. Already starting from February 1802, all the work of the committee was aimed precisely at the implementation of this idea.

Ministries

About six months later, committee members developed and approved a project for the formation of these bodies. As part of this proposal, the ministries of foreign affairs, internal affairs and public education, justice, military and naval ministries were created. At Alexander’s suggestion, this list also included the Commerce Department, which was created specifically for N.P. Rumyantsev. It is worth noting that the only completed work of the secret committee was the establishment of ministries.

1.3 Creation of the "Secret Committee"

Attempts at reform in the first years of the reign of Alexander I were associated with a circle of like-minded people, called the “Unofficial Committee”. The famous historian V.O. Klyuchevsky described the “Unofficial Committee” as the activity of the “young friends” of the emperor. By the way, the tsar, with indescribable humor, called the “Unspoken Committee” “comite du salut public,” hinting at Robespierre’s “Committee of Public Safety,” and Catherine’s nobles indignantly called the committee members “the Jacobin gang.” Indeed, the brilliant young aristocrats were admirers of advanced European political ideas. Count Pavel Aleksandrovich Stroganov in his youth, at the whim of his father, a famous philanthropist and freemason, fell into the hands of a kind of educator - Gilbert Romm, who, accompanying him on a trip abroad, introduced the young man to the Paris Jacobin Club in 1789. Prince Adam Czartoryski, while still a sixteen-year-old boy, managed to meet outstanding people era. He knew many German philologists and writers, and Goethe himself. In 1794 he fought against Russia under the banner of T. Kosciuszko. Nikolai Nikolaevich Novosiltsov, a relative of Count Stroganov, was much older than Alexander and made a great impression on him with his intelligence, education, abilities and ability to express his thoughts gracefully and accurately.

Meetings of the "Secret Committee" took place two or three times a week. After coffee and general conversation, the emperor retired, and while all the guests were leaving, four people made their way, like conspirators, along the corridor to one of the inner rooms, where Alexander was waiting for them. The Tsar instructed his young friends to develop and implement reforms, in particular, “to curb the despotism of our government” (the original words of the autocrat). The “triumvirate,” as Stroganov, Novosiltsev and Czartoryski were called behind their backs, also made an attempt to resolve the pressing issue of serfdom, although the matter did not move beyond bold plans.

Of course, Speransky immediately found himself in the thick of events and changes. Already on March 19 (a week after the accession of the new monarch; this is the date given in all formal lists) he was appointed “Secretary of State”. He became right hand Dmitry Prokofievich Troshchinsky, the trusted “speaker” of Catherine II, who inherited this most important function (“speaker and editor-in-chief”) under the new emperor. His job was to prepare and edit the most important government documents. Naturally, he needed a reliable and gifted assistant. The choice of the experienced bureaucrat fell on Speransky. Troshchinsky, a Ukrainian, the son of a simple clerk, who had made a great career over many years, may have taken into account his “simple” origin when choosing the candidate for his main assistant. One way or another, the “Decree to Our Senate” appears: “We most graciously command that Our Privy Councilor Troshchinsky be with us to rectify the affairs entrusted to him by Our power of attorney to State Councilor Speransky with the title of Our State Secretary and with a salary of two thousand rubles per year from Our Cabinet; the salary he received until now in his position as the Governor of the Office of the Commission for supplying the residence with supplies of two thousand rubles per year was converted into a pension for him on the 29th day of March 1801.”

Speransky immediately attracted the close attention of members of the “Secret Committee”, in the depths of which matured the idea of ​​​​transforming into ministries (in the European style) the inert, mired in bribery, slow, clumsy, poorly managed boards established by Peter the Great. Speransky becomes, albeit an unofficial, but active participant in the Secret Committee. He becomes Kochubey's main assistant and takes a large part in developing the conceptual foundations of the future Ministry of Internal Affairs.

A serious struggle arose between Troshchinsky and Kochubey for Speransky: each of the dignitaries sought to keep him at their disposal.

Speransky's participation is visible in the preparation of a number of laws. So, in 1801, a decree was issued allowing merchants, townspeople and peasants to buy uninhabited lands. On September 8, 1802, the highest manifesto announced (the text was prepared by Speransky) the establishment - instead of 20 boards - of 8 ministries: military (until 1808 - the Ministry of Military Ground Forces), maritime (until 1815 - the Ministry of Military naval forces), foreign affairs, justice, internal affairs, finance, commerce, public education.

Speransky prepared annual reports of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, which were published (this was a novelty) in the ministerial periodical "St. Petersburg Journal". Poet I.I. Dmitriev, himself a member of public service and who at one time held the post of Minister of Justice, recalled this period of Speransky’s life: “All draft new regulations and annual reports for the ministry were written by him. The latter had not only the merits of novelty, but also, in terms of methodological arrangement, very rare to this day in our executive papers, historical accounts of each part of management, and art in style can serve as guidance and models.”

In February 1803, with the direct participation of Speransky (concept, text), the famous Decree “on free cultivators” was published, which was perceived by the inert nobility almost as the beginning of a revolution. According to this decree, landowners received the right to release serfs to freedom, giving them land. It took many years to pay for the land; if payments were late, the peasant and his family returned to serfdom. During the reign of Alexander I, only 47 thousand people were freed.

Much has been done in the field of education. Among the transformative reforms, the School Charter of 1804 should be noted, according to which children of all classes were admitted to schools at all levels - from lower to higher. There have also been serious positive changes in the area higher education. New universities were established: Kazan, Kharkov, Vilnius, Dorpat; as well as lyceums: Nezhinsky, Yaroslavl and Tsarskoye Selo. The Main Directorate was founded in St. Petersburg pedagogical institute, which later became St. Petersburg University.

Press rights were significantly expanded. The censorship statute of 1804 exempted literature from preliminary censorship, the rights of which were clearly defined.

Speransky is gradually turning from a simple performer into one of the arbiters of Russia's destinies. Due to Kochubey's frequent absences due to illness, Speransky became the Tsar's main speaker. Desk reports developed into long conversations in which Alexander I and Speransky discussed pressing state problems and read Western political and legal literature together. From these conversations began the friendship between the All-Russian autocrat and the former popovich

Under Alexander I, the same role was destined for Speransky. His career began stellar years. Speransky began to play important role in diplomatic affairs. In those years, Europe was under the heavy burden of the genius of Napoleon. Having lost the Battle of Austerlitz to his troops, the Russian Tsar was forced to strive for peace with the French Emperor. On June 13-14, in Tilsit (a peace treaty was concluded on the Neman, according to which Russia joined the continental blockade, which was disadvantageous for it. The Tilsit peace aroused the indignation of Russian patriots.

Going to new meeting with Napoleon to Erfurt (September 2 - October 16, 1808), Alexander took Speransky with him. On September 30, the emperors signed the “Erfurt Allied Convention”, which confirmed the Tilsit agreements, Napoleonic redistribution of the continent and, most importantly, Russia’s rights to Finland (Alexander’s troops fought with the Swedes), Wallachia and Moldavia.

Speransky returns to the capital in a new status: friend (as they said then, confidant), closest associate of the monarch, absolute favorite, according to V. Prigodich, with the rank of vice-emperor (A.A. Arakcheev will take this place only after the “fall” Speransky).

Thus, Speransky began to determine the domestic and foreign policy of the state, exercise supervision over administrative, judicial and financial bodies, and unconditionally influence the most important appointments.

Cleanse yourself completely through service." Here he still does not leave the thought of government reforms and proposes, having cleansed the administrative part, to move on to political freedom. To develop the necessary reforms, Speransky advises establishing a committee of Finance Minister Guryev, several governors (including his himself) and 2 - 3 provincial leaders of the nobility In March 1819...

They led to tragic consequences for the government and society. The liberal intelligentsia became increasingly closer to the revolutionaries, while the influence of conservatives in the government camp increased. Representatives of Russian liberalism in the 19th century. much more often it was necessary to criticize the actions of the authorities than to actively participate in their policies. Even the most liberal-minded autocrats (such as...

Secret committee

In the first half of the 19th century, the importance of higher, imperial administration in public administration was significantly increased. To this end, old bodies were reorganized and new ones were created, more closely linked to local institutions.

Thus, on March 26, 1801, the Council at the Highest Court was abolished, which had lost its high position during the previous reign and ceased to function and influence the management system.

Having become emperor, in the first years of his reign, Alexander I relied on his close young associates: V.P. Kochubeya, N.N. Novosiltseva, P.A. Stroganov, A. Czartoryski, consulted with the “friends of his youth”, united them into a “secret committee”. This committee did not have official status state institution, however, it was he who had a huge influence on changes in the management of the empire. Until November 1803, almost all government measures and reform projects were discussed here, many of which were proposed by the participants in this “intimate circle of Ignatov V. G. History government controlled in Russia. M.; Phoenix, 2002. P. 378."

It is worth saying that the secret committee played a fairly significant role in the internal political life of the country. The plans for its creation were extremely extensive: from a complete reorganization of public administration, to the gradual abolition of serfdom and the introduction of a constitution in Russia. Speaking about this, it should be noted that by the constitution the members of the secret committee understood the creation of a representative institution, the proclamation of democratic freedoms, and the limitation of autocratic power through the creation of new laws.

According to many historians, including S. F. Platonov, almost all the transformations in the system of state institutions, changes in peasant legislation carried out by Alexander I in the first five years of his reign were directly or indirectly related precisely to the activities of this committee Dvornichenko A Yu. et al. Russian history from ancient times to the present day. St. Petersburg; Lan, 2004. pp. 196-197..

In particular, the active participation of members of the “secret committee” in the preparation and implementation of ministerial reform, the development of the system of ministries in Russia, the reform of the Senate, as well as a number of other major transformations in Russia is quite obvious early XIX century Starikov N.V. History of Russia from ancient times to the 20th century. M.; PRIOR, 2001. P. 291..

Establishment of a system of ministries

On September 8, 1802, the Committee of Ministers was established, which became a new and very important governing body. Its design is directly related to the creation of ministries. The manifesto establishing this authority provided for the opportunity for ministers to gather together at the initiative and under the chairmanship of the emperor for meetings to discuss complex interdepartmental issues. Ministerial meetings acquired the character of meetings between the absolute monarch and the heads of all central institutions. At the same time, the composition of the Committee was constantly expanding to include senior officials appointed by the emperor and responsible to him.

Already in 1810, its composition included the chairman, secretary of state, heads of departments of the State Council, as well as other influential officials.

On March 20, 1812, at the proposal of M. M. Speransky, the “establishment of a committee of ministers” formalized the limits of competence, functions, as well as the composition of the committee. According to him, no conclusion of the committee could be carried out until it was considered by the emperor and approved by him, and the ministers were introduced into the Senate. Ivanovsky V. State law. News and scientific notes of Kazan University. According to edition No. 5 of 1895 - No. 11 of 1896. / Allpravo.ru.

Under the direct leadership of the emperor, the committee also considered cases that related to the activities of several ministries, requiring new laws, coordinated actions, as well as extremely complicated cases that could not be resolved within the framework of the activities of only one minister. In addition, under the leadership of the emperor, materials from Senate audits, appointments, dismissals, awards, reprimands to local administrators, and even individual bills were also checked and discussed.

Unlike Western governments, headed by independent chairmen (prime ministers) and representing an association, a cabinet of ministers, the Russian Committee of Ministers was not such a government, or the head of the executive vertical of management, despite the fact that these issues were repeatedly raised in the “secret committee” and other authorities . In preparation for the establishment of ministries, it was proposed to study the experience of His Royal Majesty’s English united cabinet (ministry), which included the head of the ministry and the heads of eight sectoral departments.

It is worth noting here that both Alexander I and Nicholas I were afraid of losing some of their own supreme functions, as well as the emergence of a relatively independent head of the central executive department. Thus, it was not English that was taken as a basis, but the experience of the administrative system of Napoleonic France, where ministers were not united in one council, but were directly subordinate to Emperor Bonaparte, being members of the Senate with an advisory vote. Moreover, the Senate itself had the right to judge ministers if they violated freedom of the press and personal freedom.

The French experience greatly impressed Alexander I and Nicholas I, since it fully corresponded to their desire to keep the reins of power in their own hands. Thus, the right of the kings to personally govern the state was preserved, since it was they themselves who appointed, dismissed, controlled ministers, directed and united their actions, accepted their most submissive individual reports, and exercised through the Committee of Ministers supreme supervision over the activities of the state apparatus V. G. Ignatov. History public administration in Russia. M.; Phoenix, 2002. pp. 379-380..

As mentioned above, the emergence of ministries is closely related to general administrative reform. The implementation, nature and necessity of this reform were determined by a number of reasons. First of all, among them it is worth mentioning moral qualities Emperor Alexander I and those around him, external influences, as well as the state of state and public life.

Of course, the implementation of such an important and complex reform as the reorganization of the entire higher government administration requires a very balanced and careful approach, which means that a certain share of responsibility for its consequences lies not only with the emperor himself, but also with his associates.

Thus, the success of the transformation of the central bodies under Alexander I also largely depended on the character of the people surrounding the emperor, on their mental and moral development, on their political views. The persons closest to the emperor were members of the secret committee: Novosiltsev, Count Stroganov, Prince Kochubey, Prince Chartorizhsky and Prince Golitsyn.

Speaking about the characteristics of the character and views of Count V.P. Kochubey, it is worth emphasizing once again that he received an excellent education abroad, first in Geneva and then in London, where he successfully studied political science. Like Novosiltsev, during the reign of Paul he lived in retirement, and only under Alexander, who had sincere friendship for him, was he again called to state affairs.

Due to the characteristics of their own character, education and life path, many contemporaries were even inclined to accuse him of knowing England better than Russia, because I tried to remake a lot of things in the English manner. In general, he was an extremely intelligent man, gifted with an excellent memory and able to recognize people and use them.

When establishing ministries, Alexander I, of course, did not do without multiple meetings with his employees. We know about the content of these meetings from the notes of its participants that have reached us. Meetings regarding the organization of ministries took place within the framework of a “secret committee”, which included persons closest to the emperor, and consisted of discussing projects presented by committee members. Similar projects were presented by Chartorizhsky, Kochubey, Novosiltsev, as well as other people close to the sovereign.

The result of the meetings of the informal committee was the previously mentioned decree of September 8, 1802, which established the ministries. This decree was a surprise even for those at the highest levels of the bureaucratic hierarchy, due to which many dissatisfied people appeared who reinterpreted the decree in a sense unfavorable for it. In reality, this decree was very far from perfect.

It does not clearly define the competence of ministries, their composition, organization and office work. General establishment ministries, expressed in this manifesto, is characterized by extreme uncertainty and is filled with numerous omissions. Ivanovsky V. State Law. News and scientific notes of Kazan University. According to edition No. 5 of 1895 - No. 11 of 1896. / Allpravo.ru.

At its core, this manifesto contained a number of important provisions. It emphasized the continuity of the reform with the transformations of Peter I. The introduction of the ministerial system of public administration was motivated by the need to bring all parts of government into a stable structure, in accordance with the intentions of the emperor. It also expressed the hope that the ministries would help establish peace, quiet, justice, and the improvement of the empire in the country, as well as revive industry, trade, the entire economy as a whole, spread the sciences and arts, increase the general well-being, and ensure the well-being of the peoples included in compound Russian Empire.

According to the establishment, state affairs were now to be managed by eight ministries: military ground forces; military naval forces; foreign affairs; Justice; internal affairs; finance; commerce; of public education: “The Department of State Affairs is divided into 8 departments, each of which, containing all the parts that essentially belong to it, constitutes a special ministry and is under the direct control of the Minister, whom we appoint now, or in the future we will appoint at our discretion. State institutions in Russia. Ed. Pishchulin N.P. Nizhny Novgorod; UNN, 1994. P. 54."

It was also assumed that with the division of state affairs, each ministry would be in charge of a certain part of them. At the same time, all ministries had to ensure natural communication and unity of management. The ministers themselves were to be appointed only by the emperor and be responsible to him, as well as directly manage all the units entrusted to them. Through the Senate, ministers were required to submit annual written reports to the emperor. They had to justify the expenditure of funds by the structures of the ministry, reflect the successes in the activities of the ministry, as well as the state of current affairs and possible development prospects.

Among other things, the Senate had to consider and analyze the activities of the ministers, submit reports to the emperor with relevant conclusions, as well as an opinion on the state of management of each of the ministers. The ministers were supposed to manage the local structures entrusted to him and receive weekly memos about all their current affairs, and have constant contacts with them.

According to the manifesto, the position of “comrade minister” was also established, who was supposed to assist the minister in his activities. The positions of the Minister of Justice and the Prosecutor General of the Senate were also combined, and the functional directions, subjects and parameters of the activities of each of the ministers and the preserved state boards subordinate to him were determined http://www.i-u.ru/biblio/archive/istorija_gosudarstvennogo_upravlenija_rossii/08.aspx - _ftn3 and other institutions. Thus, the continuity of management and the evolutionary nature of the transformation of its apparatus was ensured during the transition to a qualitatively new level of unity of command, responsibility, execution and the formation of departmentalization Ignatov V. G. History of public administration in Russia. M.; Phoenix, 2002. P. 410..

In the manifesto announcing the accession to the throne of Grand Duke Alexander Pavlovich, on behalf of the latter it was solemnly announced: “We, accepting the hereditary Imperial All-Russian Throne, will accept together with the responsibilities of governing the people entrusted to us by God according to the laws and according to the heart in God of our late August grandmother... Catherine Second". The new emperor, thus, emphasized his commitment to the political course of Catherine II, who did a lot to expand noble privileges. The manifesto was drawn up by one of Catherine’s nobles, D. P. Troshchinsky, and, according to A. E. Presnyakov, “well expressed what was expected from Alexander, how the coup could be justified.”

A friendly chorus of solemn odes greeted Alexander's accession to the throne. Despite the declared mourning, festive rejoicing reigned on the streets of St. Petersburg and Moscow. The new monarch publicly renounced the despotic methods of rule of his father - this was the general opinion. But another view of Alexander’s first manifesto spread in St. Petersburg living rooms. His promise to return to the political principles of Catherine II was regarded there as evidence that Catherine's disgraced favorite Platon Zubov had regained his former influence. As M. M. Safonov shows in his monograph, the Zubovs and Palen really determined Alexander’s first political steps. Whatever the personal views of the former conspirators, they had to take into account the current situation. The change on the throne, unlike the events of 1762 and 1796, did not entail any popular movements, peasant uprisings. The merchants and philistines remained indifferent. The nobility, especially those in the capital, not only welcomed the coup, but also openly demanded a return to “Catherine’s liberties.” In order to gain a foothold in power, it was necessary to meet the nobility halfway.

Immediately upon his accession to the throne, Alexander, in the words of N. A. Troitsky, “rained a rain of merciful decrees on the nobles.” The meaning of the issued commands, as a contemporary wrote, was “in three unforgettable words: cancel, forgive, return.” On March 13, an order was issued to issue resignation decrees to all generals, headquarters and chief officers expelled from service by the maxims of a military court or without any trial at all by the highest decrees. Two days later, a similar decree followed regarding civil officials expelled from service without trial.

Decrees of March 14, 16 and 24 allowed the import and export of various industrial products from Russia, as well as the export of wine and bread. On March 15, a decree appeared on the amnesty of prisoners, exiles, and persons under supervision in cases carried out in the Secret Expedition, on the return of those deprived of ranks and nobility to their former dignity, and on the restoration of noble elections. On March 19, a decree was announced ordering the police not to go beyond the boundaries of their duties; on March 22, a decree was announced on the free passage of those traveling to and from Russia. The decree on March 31 lifted the ban on importing books and music from abroad and maintaining private printing houses. Such decrees of Paul I that irritated the nobility were cancelled, such as the ban on wearing round French hats.

On April 2, manifestos were published on the restoration of letters of grant to the nobility and cities - the most important legislative acts of Catherine’s reign. Their publication demonstrated the continuity of Alexander’s internal political course with the fundamentals of Catherine II’s internal policy. N.P. Panin wrote about Alexander: “This is the heart and soul of Catherine II, and at all hours of the day he fulfills the promise made in the manifesto.” It was also announced the destruction of the most important institution of political investigation - the Secret Expedition, which was in charge of considering cases related to lese majeste, as well as treason "to the sovereign and the state." The manifesto stated that “in a well-ordered state, all crimes should be comprehensive, judged and punished by the general force of the law.” Secret affairs were henceforth to be carried out in the Senate and in institutions in charge of criminal proceedings.

The government's first measures aroused satisfaction among various strata of the capital and local nobility. But the rise of P. Zubov and yesterday’s conspirators, who largely determined this government course, was met with irritation at the top of the capital. They were seen as the living embodiment of the regime of favoritism, the restoration of which the upper echelons of the nobility did not at all want. “The monarch is in their hands,” wrote S.G. Vorontsov. “He cannot have the willpower or the fortitude to resist what this terrible cabal wants.” He must constantly see on the faces of those who surround... him, their hidden thoughts, which they themselves express to him: “We strangled your father, and you will follow his example if you ever dare to resist our will.”

So, writes M. M. Safonov, Alexander, who equally rejected the policies of Catherine’s and Pavlov’s governments, was forced to take his first steps in the government field as a zealous supporter of Catherine’s policies. “Alexander, brought up in a dual school - enlightened absolutism and military despotism, was attracted by the dream of the role of a beneficent dictator,” wrote A. E. Presnyakov. But now the emperor was forced to do what the circles through whose efforts he was placed at the head of the country demanded of him, to adapt his ideas to their views and moods.

Alexander ascended the throne with a clear program for resolving the peasant issue. But he hardly had a specific transformation program government system. However, like Catherine II, he was a supporter of the concept of a “true monarchy.” He theoretically assumed that in the interests of the monarch (and the state), it was necessary to organize governance in such a way that the government would make as few political mistakes as possible, that is, it would act not only at the whim of the monarch, but would make the most prudent decisions. This required reorganizing government institutions so that they could keep the monarch from making wrong moves.

At the same time, the idea of ​​​​limiting tsarist autocracy became quite widespread among the dignitaries of the capital, whose interests were violated by Paul I, primarily among the leaders of the anti-Paul conspiracy. P. Zubov became the leader of this “aristocratic constitutionalism,” the goal of which, according to A.E. Presnyakov, was “to consolidate in the forms of political organization... what was achieved in the 18th century. the predominance of the nobility over state power." The first manifestation of these tendencies was the establishment of the Permanent Council (March 30, 1801). It included Prosecutor General A. A. Bekleshev, the de facto Minister of Justice, Internal Affairs and partly Finance, Vice-Chancellor A. E. Kurakin, St. Petersburg military governor P. A. Palen, other persons, including P. and V. Zubov , whose influence was the most significant. It was a legislative body under the emperor. The subject of his reasoning should have included “everything that belongs to state regulations.” Matters in the Council are considered either at the behest of the monarch, or at the proposal of one of the advisers, which is brought before the monarch if it is approved by the majority of the Council. When the matter is approved by a majority of votes, a protocol is drawn up, which includes the opinions expressed during the discussion. Based on the protocol, the monarch makes a decision and issues a decree. Which opinion will form the basis of the decree depends on the discretion of the monarch. The Council was given important discretion to develop projects for government reforms. After the establishment of the Permanent Council, the power of the emperor remained unlimited, but certain conditions arose for advisers to control the activities of the autocratic government. The role of the Council depended on the extent to which Alexander would be guided by his opinion in his decisions.

At the beginning of the reign of Alexander I, the position of the Council largely predetermined its decisions on the most important issues of internal and foreign policy. Thus, Alexander’s actions to normalize relations with England in April-May 1801 were made in strict accordance with the decisions of the Council.

Soon after his accession, Alexander summoned A. Czartoryski, N. Novosiltsev and V. Kochubey to St. Petersburg. Even then, Alexander’s policy showed the peculiarity that the American historian A. Palmer talks about: the emperor was attracted to such a structure of decision-making and governance, in which he found himself standing above the factions fighting for influence. Alexander had not yet called on his “young friends” to work together - in the difficult situation in which he was still in, he had no time for them yet. But since Stroganov himself proposed to Alexander I to create a secret committee to work on the reform of the board, the tsar needed to somehow respond to this proposal, especially since he was not going to refuse the help of “young friends” in the future. Alexander agreed to the organization of a committee and decided that its members would be former members of the Grand Duke's circle, and each of them would have to work with him secretly.

While Stroganov was writing lengthy discussions about the “principles of reform,” Alexander took practical steps to implement his program for solving the peasant question, which his “young friends” apparently did not know about. As a kind of preliminary measure, Alexander immediately after his accession to the throne, without any decree, stopped the distribution of state-owned peasants into private hands, which, as A. N. Pypin wrote, “reached such terrifying proportions under Catherine and Paul.” Now Alexander began with the first point of his program - with the preparation of a decree prohibiting the sale of serfs without land. The preparation of documents was entrusted to A. A Bekleshev. The note submitted by Bekleshev to the Council on May 6 (and Alexander stood behind it) was the first document emanating from state power, where the landowners’ abuse of their rights was sharply condemned.

On May 16, Alexander attended the meeting of the Permanent Council for the first time. He tried to defend his proposal, but the advisers remained of the same opinion. Faced with a position that apparently came as a surprise to the king, Alexander retreated. After 12 days, he issued a ban on placing advertisements in newspapers about the sale of serfs without land. Thus ended the first attempt to begin solving the peasant question. But Alexander's retreat was temporary. Apparently, he has not yet realized that the entire nobility and the established bureaucracy speak through the mouth of the Council. The tsar has so far seen only resistance from the newly formed legislative body.

On June 5, Alexander issued a decree instructing the Senate to submit a report on violations of the original rights of this body and to speak out regarding what the Senate could now become. “The impression made by this decree in the Senate was universal, and in a few days it was communicated to the entire educated public of the capital.” The senators decided to express their most loyal gratitude to the monarch. With this decree, Alexander again met the demands of those individuals and circles that elevated him to the throne. They expected that Alexander would put the Senate at the head of the entire administration and grant it the right to make representations to the king if the decrees he issued were inconvenient for execution or contradicted previously issued acts. Thus, the Senate, an organ of the noble bureaucracy, could influence the legislative activities of the emperor.

On the same day, June 5, a decree was issued to create a Law Drafting Commission. Alexander, who loved to talk about the priority of the law - “the beginning and source of the people's well-being,” believed, in addition, that bringing the constitution into force was possible only after streamlining the legislation.

Soon events occurred that largely changed the balance of power in the government camp. Palen's political career ended. The reason for this was the conflict between Maria Fedorovna and Palen. She demanded that Alexander remove Palen. The intrigues of N.P. Panin and the Zubovs also played a role. But after the fall of Palen, the Zubovs had to behave with the greatest restraint. "Young Friends" began to gain strength. All this affected Alexander’s reform activities.

On June 18, Czartoryski arrived in St. Petersburg. This gave a new impetus to the activities of the “young friends”. Stroganov drew up a plan for their actions, hoping to use Alexander’s character. Stroganov defined his personal properties as follows: “The Emperor ascended the throne with the most wonderful intentions to put everything on a better footing. This is hindered only by his inexperience and his character, soft and sluggish... In order to have influence on him, it is necessary... to enslave him. Since he is distinguished by great purity of principles, the way to subdue him ... is to reduce everything to principles ... which he could not doubt.”

After Palen was removed, Alexander felt much freer and decided to use the help of “young friends.” On June 24, 1801, in the Kamennoostrovsky Palace, after dinner at the imperial table, Stroganov, Novosiltsev and Czartoryski were secretly led into Alexander’s dressing room, where he was waiting for them. Thus began the meetings of the Secret Committee. However, its existence soon ceased to be a secret. Without the status of an official government agency, the Secret Committee largely determined the transformation program. However, it is necessary to take into account the fact that, as A.E. Presnyakov wrote, this “group of Alexander’s employees, which he jokingly called the “Committee of Public Safety”, and angry critics scolded “Jacobins”, belonged to the same environment of the large aristocracy and is ready was to go only to the minimum of necessary transformations and then with great gradualness and without the slightest “shocks,” recognizing that otherwise it would be better not to do anything.” Attracting to government activities“young friends,” Alexander pursued a specific goal: “possessing little power, in the eyes of the world they turned out to be the culprits of all unpopular decisions” (A. I. Arkhangelsky).

The main subject of study for members of the Secret Committee in the summer of 1801 was coronation projects. Alexander decided to prepare a “Certificate” for the day of his coronation, in which the rights of Russians would be proclaimed. Alexander submitted the draft “Certificates” to the discussion of the Permanent Council on September 9. Councilors approved the project. It was a controversial document. On the one hand, he not only consolidated exclusive noble privileges, but also developed them further. This reflected the interests of those who elevated Alexander to the throne. On the other hand, the “Certificate” provided all Russian citizens with rights that even nobles did not previously have (the right to personal security and property, freedom of conscience, speech). Here Alexander acted in accordance with his plans, almost without taking into account the recommendations of his “young friends.” It should be noted that from the draft “Charter” Alexander crossed out the clause on the heredity of the Russian throne.

Along with the “Certificate”, another document was also being prepared, entirely devoted to the situation of the peasants. He was introduced to Alexander I by P. Zubov: now, in order to gain a foothold in power, Zubov no longer had to worry so much about protecting the interests of the nobility as adapting to the mood of the tsar. This project prohibited the sale of peasants without land, and allowed the redemption of serfs without the consent of the landowner.

Alexander approved the project, but since it deprived the nobles of the most significant privilege - unlimited power over the serfs - he did not submit it for discussion to the Permanent Council. A number of projects for transforming the Senate were also prepared for the coronation. Alexander decided that it would be more expedient to reform this body by his own decrees, without waiting for the expression of the senators' opinion on this matter. Through the right of representation, the Senate would become a body influencing the legislative activities of the monarch. (His assistant M. M. Speransky, appointed Secretary of State on July 9, 1801 - a supporter of the “true monarchy”), took part in writing one of the projects together with D. P. Troshchinsky.

The Senate reform had many influential opponents from Alexander’s inner circle. The “Young Friends” sought to prevent the Senate from becoming a constitutional institution, mainly because they could only successfully play the role of secret advisers under an autocratic monarch. The Tsar's mother Maria Feodorovna and the parents of Alexander's wife objected to the reforms, which could turn out to be “untimely” and “dangerous in their consequences.” Members of the Permanent Council I.V. Lamb, A.I. Vasiliev, A.A. Bekleshev convinced Alexander that the reform of the Senate would entail a reduction in his power. La Harpe, who reappeared in Russia at the end of August 1801, categorically objected to the reforms. “In the name of your people, sir,” Laharpe urged, “keep the power entrusted to you intact... Do not let yourself be led astray by the disgust that unlimited power inspires in you. Have the courage to preserve it entirely... until the moment when, under your leadership, the necessary work is completed, and you can retain to yourself exactly as much power as is necessary for an energetic government.” But Alexander defended the prepared projects, including the project prepared by P. Zubov. What was important here was not only Alexander’s desire to “curb the despotism of our rule,” but also the fact that Zubov had a large clientele among the guards’ youth.

Coronation projects were an attempt to combine bourgeois principles with Russian realities. This determined their inconsistency. In the “Charter”, Alexander assured the nobility of the inviolability of their privileges. But the manifesto on the peasant question was the first step towards the abolition of serfdom. In addition, if the Senate had been reformed in accordance with the project, then one can imagine what consequences Alexander’s attempts to resolve the peasant issue would have caused. “The logic of “common sense,” writes M. M. Safonov, “pushed Alexander along the path of strengthening his power, to which his “young friends” and Laharpe had long been pushing him.” However, it was not easy to turn away from the path along which the king was led by those who placed him on the throne while these persons remained in their places. Some researchers, however, believe that Alexander had another opportunity: “to awaken the power of public opinion,” to turn to society and rely on it, and thereby break the resistance of the “tops.” This is what Alexander P later did. However, is it possible to prove that in the first years of his reign Alexander I had someone to rely on?.. There was a lot of truth in the words of La Harpe, who pointed out to the emperor that almost the entire nobility, bureaucrats, and the great honor of the merchants would be against the reforms ( dreaming of acquiring noble status). The Russian people “possess will and courage,” but they were “kept in slavery,” and they cannot be attracted to reforms, because “they will not go where they should.” You can rely only on the more educated minority of nobles, especially young officers, some part of the bourgeoisie, “a few writers.” These forces are clearly insufficient, but La Harpe, firstly, hopes for the enormous authority of the royal name (and therefore urges not to limit the autocracy to representative institutions), and, secondly, advises Alexander to develop the sphere of education as energetically as possible in order to rely on enlightened youth.

On September 15, 1801, the coronation ceremony was performed in the Assumption Cathedral of the Kremlin. The coronation manifesto announced the granting of various favors to the people. But neither this nor the following years, to the disappointment of the upper nobility, not a single coronation project was published. Two weeks after the coronation, Panin was forced to resign.

In October 1801, at meetings of the Secret Committee, discussion of the peasant issue began again. By this time, Alexander was convinced that it was dangerous to offend the interests of the nobility. However, the opposition that the tsar faced was, according to A.E. Presnyakov, “strong not only because of the unity of interests hostile to the transformation, but also because these interests still had a strong... basis in Russian reality. Thus, the defenders of serfdom pointed to the importance of the landowner's economy in the country's economy,... to the landowner's power as a necessary support in governing the country... Alexander was faced with an integral system of socio-political relations, which was fundamentally contrary to his principles, and he had to base it on recognize with approval of the Charter to the nobility." But Alexander was not going to give up his plan. He decided for now to limit himself only to allowing non-nobles (except serfs) to buy uninhabited lands. By issuing such a decree, Alexander did not have to fear too strong a protest among the nobility, which took an ambivalent position on this issue. Alexander did not yet know exactly the extent of possible discontent, so he firmly decided to follow the intended path gradually, and not move on to the next measure without carefully analyzing the effect of the previous one.

On December 12, 1801, the decree was signed. Thus, the violation of the principle of monopoly ownership of land by nobles received legislative formalization. “A hole was made in the body of unshakable noble privileges,” writes M. M. Safonov.

According to a contemporary, “the claims of Zubov, who wanted... to rule, and the constant complaints of the Empress-Mother, who since the death of her husband... refused to see him... hastened his removal, and the emperor, very pleased that he could refer to his parent, ordered a hint to be given to him soon after his coronation so that he would ask for leave abroad. On December 24, P. Zubov presented Alexander with his request for this. But at the end of December, rumors spread throughout the capital that the Zubovs were preparing palace coup in favor of Maria Fedorovna. Stroganov wrote them down and handed them over to the Tsar. It is difficult to judge how real the danger was. However, Stroganov's records recorded the dissatisfaction of part of the Council and Catherine's nobility with Alexander's timid attempts to follow the path of reform. In January 1802, P. Zubov received a foreign passport and left Russia. Alexander stopped feeling dependent on the former conspirators and began organizing government.

In February 1802, at the request of Alexander, Czartoryski prepared a note on the progress of reforming public administration and drew up a diagram of the future organization of public administration. At its head was the emperor. The Council was with him. Executive power was divided among eight ministers, in whose hands all the threads of administration would be held. Protective power was entrusted to the Senate, which was divided into government and judicial. Alexander approved the note. The plans of the “young friends” reflected in the “Table” were timed for the distant future, when, according to Stroganov, “minds will be able to take part in representative government.” In the meantime, based on this plan, members of the Secret Committee considered it necessary to begin solving urgent problems, first of all, organizing the executive branch and replacing the collegiate system with a ministerial one. The idea of ​​introducing ministries was repeatedly expressed throughout the 18th century. Therefore, the plans of the “young friends” turned out to be in tune with the sentiments of the dignitaries. Indeed, the boards no longer met the increasingly complex tasks of governing the country. “Young friends” convinced the emperor to establish a Committee of Ministers and expand the Permanent Council, which, along with ministers, would include previously appointed advisers, and the importance of which would be significantly downplayed.

On September 8, 1802, a manifesto was issued on the establishment of ministries and a decree on the rights of the Senate. According to the first decree, 8 ministries were created: military-ground forces, foreign affairs (but it still retained the name collegium), justice, internal affairs, finance, commerce and public education. The boards were retained, but were subordinated to the ministers. All ministers, with the exception of military, naval and commerce, received assistants with the title of Comrade Minister. Each minister had to create an office. In their activities, ministers are responsible to the monarch and the Senate, which examines the activities of the ministry and then submits a written report to the monarch. The Senate has the right to demand clarification from the minister about this or that direction of his work, and, if it turns out to be unsatisfactory, to report it to the king.

Both representatives of Catherine’s nobility (G.R. Derzhavin, M.S. Mordvinov, P.V. Zavadovsky) and the new one, including Alexander’s “young friends,” were appointed first ministers and comrades of ministers. V.P. Kochubey, appointed Minister of Internal Affairs, took M.M. Speransky to his place.

The decree on the rights of the Senate defined this institution as the “supreme seat of the empire,” governing all “public places,” and the highest judicial authority. The Senate was given the right to submit to the emperor regarding those decrees that are not consistent with other laws or are associated with “great inconvenience in execution.” In the acts of September 8, Alexander met both the wishes of the majority of senators and “young friends.” On the other hand, these acts, writes M. M. Safonov, “although not entirely consistently, legally formalized... the system that was taking shape during the second half of the 18th century. a system of individual management, which expressed a tendency towards centralization of government and its concentration in the hands of the monarch.” “A major step was taken towards the centralization of public administration, increasing its flexibility and efficiency.”

On December 5, 1802, Alexander signed a decree introducing compulsory service for nobles who had not reached the rank of officer. This measure was caused by a shortage of military personnel, resulting from the reluctance of the nobility to serve. However, the Senate saw in this decree a violation of the Charter of the Nobility, which proclaimed the freedom of nobles from compulsory service, and, using its right, made a representation about this to Alexander. The nobility of both capitals staged noisy demonstrations in support of the Senate. All this caused sharp discontent of the emperor. On March 21, 1803, a decree was published, which proved that the act of December 5 did not contain a violation of the Charter of the Nobility, and explained Article IX of the decree on the rights of the Senate. According to the clarification, the right of representation did not apply to new or newly confirmed decrees. “This decree,” writes M. M. Safonov, “gave the impression of a bomb exploding... Experiments in the spirit of a “true monarchy” ended before they even began.” The Senate never again exercised its right to make representations, including on ministerial reports approved by the emperor, because such reports could be subsumed under the category of “newly issued” laws. The responsibility of ministers has become a fiction.

The incident with the right of representation showed what role the body of noble representation, into which the Senate was going to be turned, would play in resolving the most important issues of the time. As A.E. Presnyakov notes, if the government “intended to embark on broad reforms and did not count on the support of wide public circles, it... needed executive bodies... adapted to carry out its plans. Ministries should have been such bodies.” Thus, in the current conditions, the government had to further follow the path of centralization and bureaucratization of the state apparatus, improving all its links and removing from it elements containing restrictive tendencies. It was this path that Alexander took. He did not give up the desire to transform the autocracy into a “true” monarchy, through “legally free” institutions to ensure the conditions for the peaceful development of the country, protecting it both from revolutionary upheavals and from government despotism. But “legitimately free” institutions should not constrain the “power of government,” but serve it in its guiding political activity a reliable support, along with two others: a disciplined army and a system of public education that educates citizens in accordance with the “types of government.”

The experience of the first years of his reign led Alexander I to the conclusion that while preparatory work for future transformations, autocratic power must be strong and free in its actions, must be the only active force of innovation, without any participation of social elements. Alexander saw that the environment around him was full of interests hostile to transformation, and his own employees continually created obstacles. Alexander emerged from the impressions of his youth and from further experience with a mood that was sometimes expressed in judgments like: “I don’t trust anyone, I only believe that all people are scoundrels...”

In 1803, the Secret Committee held only 4 meetings. By this time, Alexander already felt quite firmly on the throne and did not need “young friends.” They are losing their former influence. In general, we can say that Alexander sought to implement the recommendations of La Harpe. One must be able, La Harpe advised, to play the imperial role, and ministers must be accustomed to the idea that they are only his authorized representatives, obliged to bring to him all the information about affairs in its entirety, and he listens carefully to their opinions, but will make the decision himself without them, so that they will only have to do it.

In April 1803, Alexander called A. A. Arakcheev into service, who by this time had a firmly established reputation as the “bogeyman of the Pavlovian era.” However, Alexander appreciated in Arakcheev, as N. N. Muravyov pointed out, “the readiness and activity to carry out ... what was ordered to him,” as well as the fact that he “did not join any party” at court (P. A. Vyazemsky). On May 14, 1803, the emperor reinstated Arakcheev as inspector of all artillery. The Count, with his extensive knowledge of artillery and organizational talent, was the most suitable figure for this position on the eve of the war with France.

In the same year, Alexander appointed his longtime friend Prince A. N. Golitsyn chief prosecutor of the Holy Synod. Golitsyn actually began to rule over all affairs of the Orthodox Church. As A.E. Presnyakov pointed out, Alexander I inherited from the 18th century the idea of ​​religion as one of the instruments of power over society, of the church organization as a state institution. Alexander I had a negative attitude towards the free-thinking rationalism of the 18th century, but traditional churchliness - both Orthodox and Catholic - was alien to him. He was attracted by the piety of the Protestant type, in which only the “law of Christ” remained from Christianity - the desire to live according to the moral commandments of the Gospel without any possibility of confrontation between the church community and the secular state.

Here Alexander saw the guarantee of law-abidingness, reliable protection against the spread revolutionary ideas. The atmosphere of the Gatchina court of his youth was close to him, with sympathy for Freemasonry, which sought self-improvement “on the paths of Christian moral teaching,” but while liberating people from the “religious errors” of their ancestors.

On February 20, 1803, a decree on free cultivators was issued. It provided for the liberation of serfs for ransom by entire villages or individual families by mutual agreement with the landowner. However, landowners could previously release peasants at will. The decree was intended to encourage landowners to expand this practice, with the obligatory condition of allocating land ownership to peasants. The peasants who emerged from serfdom in this way did not leave the status of the tax-paying class. But the opportunity arose in the country to create a new social group - free cultivators who owned land by private property rights. The decree for the first time approved the possibility of liberating the peasants. Alexander I had high hopes for the decree of February 20, 1803. Every year his office received information about peasants transferred to a new category. But the results of the decree were insignificant: during the entire reign of Alexander I, 160 transactions were concluded, according to which 47 thousand souls of male peasants were redeemed (less than 0.5% of the total number of serfs). The point was not only the reluctance of many landowners to grant freedom to the serfs even for ransom, but also the difficult financial conditions ransom: the ransom price for one male soul at that time was about 400 rubles in banknotes (100 rubles in silver), that is, 15-20 annual quitrents. Usually, those who received freedom on the basis of this decree were not able to pay the entire redemption amount at once, and contracts for manumission contained enslaving conditions: installment ransom at high interest rates, labor, etc. The decree also stated: “If a peasant or an entire village does not fulfill of its obligations, then it is returned to the landowner with the land and family as before.”

In 1802-1804 a reform was carried out public education, the plans of which were considered at meetings of the Secret Committee. As A. N. Pypin wrote, since the time of Peter I in Russia “there has not been as much concern about establishing schools as in these years.” The education system was based on the principles of classlessness, free education at lower levels, and continuity curricula so that those who graduate from a lower level can easily move to a higher one.

The government paid main attention to the development of secondary and higher education: trained officials, specialists for industry and trade, doctors, and teachers were required. In addition, the "highest educational establishments“,” wrote A. E. Presnyakov, “were supposed to instill new knowledge and ... ideas, disseminating them deep into all layers of the population.” The decree of January 24, 1803 also provided for measures to stimulate the acquisition of education. One of its points stated that after 5 years after the decree was issued, “no one will be assigned to a civil position requiring legal and other knowledge without completing studies at a public or private school.” In 1802-1805 Dorpat, Vilna, Kharkov and Kazan universities were opened. The Charter of the Universities, issued on November 5, 1504, granted them significant autonomy.

The government's attitude to education is evidenced by the figures of government allocations for the needs of public education. The largest vacation for these purposes under Catherine II amounted to 760 thousand rubles per year. In 1804, 2,800 thousand rubles were allocated for the educational sphere, and subsequently during the reign of Alexander I, despite frequent wars, educational expenses did not decrease. The emperor patronized the opening of scientists and literary societies. In 1803, the royal rescript approved N.M. Karamzin as a historiographer.

On May 9, 1804, the Charter on Censorship was issued, considered the most “liberal” in Russia XIX century. N. N. Novosiltsev took part in its development. Censorship was carried out, according to the Charter, by censorship committees at universities consisting of professors and masters. The charter stated that censorship serves “not to restrict the freedom to think and write, but solely to take ... measures against its abuse.” Censors were advised to be guided by “prudent condescension, avoiding any biased interpretation of works or places in them... when a place subject to doubt has a double meaning, in this case it is better to interpret it in the most favorable way for the writer.”

Censorship relaxations during these years contributed to the expansion of publishing activity. A number of new magazines and almanacs appeared, the publication of translations increased foreign literature. On the initiative of Alexander I himself, at the expense of the treasury, the works of A. Smith, J. Bentham, C. Beccaria, C. Delolme, C. Montesquieu were first translated into Russian and published - “the gospel of political liberalism,” in the words of A.E. Presnyakov, as well as the works of Diderot, Rousseau, Voltaire. “Alexander,” wrote A.E. Presnyakov, “at the end of his life had reason to say that he himself sowed the beginnings of those ideas that nourished the Decembrist movement.” “A new beneficial beginning,” according to A. N. Pypin, was the publicity of government activities. The semi-official “St. Petersburg Journal” was founded, where ministerial reports were published.

In 1804-1805, an agrarian reform was carried out in the Baltic region. The Baltic provinces were different from the rest of Russia. Serfdom in its extreme forms did not exist here, and the level of development of commodity-money relations was significantly higher than in European Russia. The main thing is that the landowners have already realized the economic disadvantage of maintaining serfdom intact. On February 20, 1804, the “Regulations on the Livonian Peasants” was published, which was extended to Estonia the following year. Peasants - “yard owners” were declared lifelong and hereditary holders of their plots, for which they were obliged to serve corvee or quitrent to the land owner. Duties were determined depending on the quantity and quality of land, that is, they were regulated by the state. The landowner's power over the peasants was thus limited. “Several government measures... in favor of the serf peasantry... several cases where Emperor Alexander strictly punished cruel treatment of the peasants and, moreover, made these punishments public, further strengthened the impression, and although the issue remained... unresolved, the first government interventions showed, although in the long term, the possibility of solving it. Since then, for the first time, the idea of ​​​​the liberation of the peasants has firmly sunk into society,” noted A. N. Pypin.

By the end of the period under review, Alexander I began to pay more and more attention to foreign policy. But in its most important areas, his actions were also largely determined by the concept of “legitimately free” institutions.

So, taking all the circumstances into account, we can agree with those researchers who believe that the policy of Alexander I during the period under review was not “flirting with liberalism.” It was a policy of transformation, write V. A. Fedorov and V. N. Fedosov, aimed primarily at the reorganization of central administration, reform of education and the press, and to a lesser extent - social sphere. The events of these years, as N. Ya. Eidelman pointed out, “are easy to criticize as private, half-hearted, but the government itself did not consider them fundamental.”

Secret committee

The days of the Alexandrovs began wonderfully.

Alexander Pushkin

It was very easy for the Russian sovereigns who ascended the throne to begin: it was enough to abolish, forgive, rehabilitate - correct what was done by their predecessor. Pushkin recalled with longing in 1822. beautiful days the beginning of Alexander's reign. In 1801 everyone was happy. On March 15, 4 days after the murder of Paul, the new tsar forgave 156 people, including Radishchev. Subsequent decrees pardoned other victims of the overthrown emperor - a total of 12 thousand people. Taking into account the small size of the ruling stratum, which was primarily the target of the wrath of Paul I, this figure is very impressive. In March, noble elections in the provinces were restored; those who fled abroad were amnestied; free entry and exit abroad declared; Private printing houses and the import of all kinds of books from abroad are allowed. On April 2, the charter granted to the nobility and cities, given by Catherine, was restored. The secret expedition - the emperor's secret police - was destroyed. On September 27, torture and “biased interrogations” were prohibited. The very word “torture” was forbidden to be used in business.

In manifestos, decrees, and private conversations, Alexander I expresses his ardent desire to replace arbitrariness with legality. To prepare and implement the necessary reforms, Alexander gathers around him friends, young people, who in May 1801 become members of a special Secret Committee.

The composition of the committee, which met in secret until September 1804, aroused hopes among supporters of reforms and fears among opponents. Alexander appointed four representatives of the new generation as members of the committee, brought up on the most advanced ideas of the 18th century, who knew Western Europe very well. Alexander did not appoint Laharpe, who came to St. Petersburg at the invitation of the emperor, to the committee, although he spoke with him a lot.

In the second half of the 19th century. The minutes of the meetings of the Secret Committee were published, all its members wrote memoirs. The first clash of dreams and reality experienced by Alexander I is well documented. A note on the need to create a special Secret Committee to discuss the plan for the transformation of Russia was presented to the Tsar by Count Pavel Stroganov (1772-1817), the only son of the richest of Catherine’s nobles, a personal friend of Alexander. In 1790, together with his teacher, the French republican mathematician Gilbert Romm, Pavel Stroganov ended up in Paris. He joined the Jacobin club and became the lover of the frantic revolutionary Théroigne de Mericourt. Summoned by Catherine to St. Petersburg and sent to the village, Pavel Stroganov was soon returned to court. Prince Adam Czartoryski (1770-1861) introduced him to Grand Duke Alexander. Alexander, rushing between Catherine’s court and his father’s Gatchina court, chose as his friend Prince Czartoryski, who was in St. Petersburg as a hostage after the defeat of the Kosciuszko uprising. The friendship continued even after the heir became emperor. Even rumors about the heir’s young wife’s infatuation with the Polish prince did not interfere with close relationships. They said that when Grand Duchess Elizabeth's daughter was born in May 1799, and she was shown to Pavel. The Emperor asked State Lady Lieven: “Madam, is it possible for a blond husband and a blond wife to have a black baby?” The lady of state quite rightly objected: “Sir! God is omnipotent." Adam Czartoryski was “exiled” as an ambassador to the court of the king of Sardinia, who was in exile, but remained close to Alexander - and was summoned to St. Petersburg after the murder of Paul.

The third member of the committee was Pavel Stroganov's cousin Nikolai Novosiltsev (1761-1836). The fourth was Viktor Kochubey (1768-1834), nephew of Chancellor Bezborodko, raised in England, who at the age of 24 served as ambassador to Constantinople.

The talented, educated friends of the emperor at the very first meeting of the Secret Committee formulated the tasks and plan of its work: to find out the actual state of affairs in Russia; to reform the governmental mechanism and, finally, to ensure the existence and independence of state institutions by a constitution granted by the autocratic power and consistent with the spirit of the Russian people. Two fundamental, unchangeable problems were on the agenda: autocracy and serfdom. Alexander understood the need for reforms and agreed with La Harpe, who said that “the law is higher than the monarch.” The dilemma was the squaring of a circle: how to limit autocracy without limiting the power of the sovereign? Derzhavin says that, as a minister, he insisted in a conversation with Alexander on some of his proposals: “You always want to teach me,” the sovereign said with anger. “I am an autocratic sovereign and that’s how I want it.”11 The conversation took place during the most liberal era of the reign.

The peasant question was no less difficult. During its discussion in the Secret Committee, different opinions were expressed. Czartoryski spoke out against serfdom, because keeping people in slavery was immoral. Novosiltsev and Stroganov spoke about the danger of irritating the nobility. The only measures to resolve the peasant issue were the adoption of the project of Admiral Mordvinov (who spent many years in England, where, as his biographer writes, “he was imbued with the spirit of English science and respect for the institutions of this country”12) and the project of Count Rumyantsev on free cultivators. Mordvinov approached the peasant issue from an unexpected angle. An admirer of Adam Smith and Bentham, he believed that it was necessary to create an economic system in which the nobility itself would recognize the unprofitability of the forced labor of serfs and would itself renounce its rights. Mordvinov proposed giving the right to own real estate to merchants, townspeople and state-owned peasants, thus depriving the nobility of their monopoly on land ownership. As a result, in his opinion, farms with hired workers will arise, who will compete with serfdom and induce landowners to agree to the emancipation of the peasants. In 1801 this project became law.

In 1803, according to Rumyantsev’s project, a law on “free cultivators” was adopted. The landowners were allowed to set the peasants free with a plot of land for a fee. The peasants, without registering in another state, became “free cultivators.” To conclude a deal, it was therefore necessary to have the consent of the landowner and the availability of money from the peasant. On the basis of this decree, 47,153 families were freed during the reign of Alexander I, and 67,149 families during the reign of Nicholas I.

The law on “free cultivators,” as well as the deprivation of the nobility’s monopoly on land ownership, testified to the desire to find a solution to the peasant question and at the same time to the absence of both a plan and the will to implement it. La Harpe, who was considered a Jacobin and a democrat, also did not know what to do. He considered the main need of Russia to be education, without which nothing could be done, but at the same time he recognized that under the conditions of serfdom, education was very difficult to spread. Even the Swiss Republican could not find a way out of the vicious circle.

The members of the Secret Committee completely completed only one task - the transformation of the central government bodies. On September 8, 1802, ministries were established, replacing the previous collegiums: foreign affairs, military and naval, and new ministries - internal affairs, finance, public education, justice and commerce. The new rules of the Senate defined its functions as a body of state supervision over the administration and the highest court.

The activities of the Secret Committee aroused fears, discontent, and resistance. Derzhavin, appointed Minister of Justice, sharply criticized the idea of ​​the ministries, emphasizing that the project was created by “Prince Czartoryski and Kochubey, people who have no thorough knowledge of either the state or civil affairs”13. The poet-minister did not like not only his new colleagues (Adam Czartoryski was appointed comrade of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Count Vorontsov, and Viktor Kochubey - the Minister of Internal Affairs), but also the unpreparedness of the law, the uncertainty of the rights and responsibilities of the minister.

What irritated Gavrila Derzhavin most was the “constitutional French and Polish spirit” with which the emperor’s entourage was “stuffed”. The author of the “Notes” names Czartoryski’s name in full, but limits himself to letters when speaking about other “Jacobins”: N[ovosiltsev], K[ochubey], S[troganov]14. Prince Czartoryski, who under Alexander Vorontsov, who was considered a very old man (he was 61 years old), became practically the head of Russian foreign policy, was especially unpleasant to Derzhavin, as the most influential of the “Poles and Poles surrounding the sovereign”15. The hint of “Pole” was obvious to contemporaries, who knew that the emperor’s mistress was Maria Naryshkina, nee Princess Chetvertinskaya, a Pole, therefore, “a beauty and a coquette,” as they said about her.

Gavrila Derzhavin’s opinion about the activities of the Secret Committee and its members was generally accepted in the highest circles of society.

This was not the only thing that hindered the work of the Committee. There was a reason that can be called administrative. Dreaming of a constitution, a rule of law state, the Committee was a powerless body, born of the will of the monarch. “Meanwhile,” wrote Adam Czartoryski, “the real government - the Senate and the ministers - continued to govern and conduct affairs in its own way, because as soon as the emperor left the toilet room in which our meetings took place, he again succumbed to the influence of the old ministers and did not could carry out none of the decisions that we made in the informal committee."16 Prince Czartoryski, who wrote his memoirs many years after his activities in the Secret Committee, blames the insignificance of the results on the emperor, on his hesitation and concessions to the “old ministers.” A modern historian agrees that Alexander I was not ready to take decisive steps in the field of reforms, that he “only perceived with his feelings the invincibility of the impending changes, but with his mind, as a son of the time and a representative of his environment, he understood that their onset would mean before only a change in his own position as an unlimited monarch."17

Alexander Kiesewetter, author psychological portrait Alexander I, argues with the view of the weakness and indecisiveness of his son Paul. On the contrary, it emphasizes his determination and ability to insist on his point of view. At the same time, the historian admits that among the members of the Secret Committee, “Alexander was the least inclined to take any decisive steps along the path of political innovation.” And he explains this for two reasons. The first is a combination of an enthusiastic attitude towards the wonderful ghost of political freedom and a reluctance to actually realize this ghost. “There was neither insincerity nor weakness of will here; here there was only a cold love for an abstract dream, combined with the fear that the dream would disappear when trying to realize it”18. In addition to fears of a psychological nature, there lived in Alexander a completely real fear: his grandfather and his father were killed by his inner circle, dissatisfied with their policies.

Alexander's hesitation, indecision, fears and fears had real grounds. The sober Laharpe, who for some time was a member of the Helvetic Directory, which gave him government experience, returned to Russia at the invitation of the emperor, compiled an analysis for his former student social forces depending on their attitude to reforms. Almost all of the nobility, bureaucrats, and most of the merchants (they dream of becoming nobles and owning serfs) will be against it, according to Laharpe. Those who are frightened by the “French example: almost all people are of mature age” will be especially opposed to reforms; almost all are foreigners.” La Harpe warns against involving the people in the transformation. Russians “have will, courage, good nature, cheerfulness,” but they were kept in slavery, they are not enlightened. Therefore, although “the people want change... they will not go where they should.” The forces on which the reformer tsar can rely are small: an educated minority of nobles (especially “young officers”), some of the bourgeoisie, a few writers. Therefore, the Swiss republican does not recommend limiting autocracy (the traditional authority of the royal name is a huge force) and proposes to act as energetically as possible in the field of education19.

Historians and conservative contemporaries, primarily Karamzin (who combined both qualities), reproached Alexander I for being too prone to reforms and weak-willedly following unkind advisers. Liberal historians criticized Alexander I for his indecisiveness in carrying out reforms. Karamzin, in a “Note” addressed to the monarch, recalled the “rule of the wise”, who knew that “every news in the state order is evil”20. Klyuchevsky said about Alexander: “a beautiful flower, but a hothouse one,” “he was convinced that freedom and prosperity would be established immediately, by themselves, without labor or obstacles, somehow magically “suddenly”21.

In the second half of the 80s of the 20th century, in the first years of “perestroika”, which sowed many illusions, Soviet historians turned to the past in search of analogies. Nathan Eidelman most clearly outlined the theory of “revolution from above,” the only possible (not bloody) one in Russia. Analyzing the activities of Alexander I, he came to the conclusion that “in Russia, “you know better from above.” Underdevelopment of socio-political life, centuries-old practice autocratic rule led to the fact that “at the very top, among ministers and kings, it is natural for people to appear who know better the interests of their class, estate, and the state as a whole.” Using a chess term, Nathan Eidelman says that those who “know better” can count “two moves ahead,” while serf owners and most bureaucrats can only count “one move ahead.”22

The insignificant results of the activities of the Secret Committee, the inability to find an answer to two main questions - political and social: how to limit autocracy without limiting the autocrat and how to free the peasants without offending their owners - did not mean that society remained motionless. And this movement was undoubtedly due to the initiatives and views of Alexander I at this time.

The grandson of Catherine, who inherited an empire, the expansion of which would continue under him, Alexander I very well felt the imperial character of Russia. This was expressed in his interest in the problem of managing a vast territory. In his youth, Alexander showed an interest in federalism, which can easily be explained by the influence of La Harpe. Having ascended the throne, he made attempts to establish a relationship with Thomas Jefferson, elected President of the United States in 1801. A reflection of this interest was the reform of provincial government. The governor reported directly to the sovereign, but the provincial departments were subordinated not to the Senate, as before, but to the ministries. “Some administrative decentralization became possible, leaving more freedom for local initiative and autonomy; this was necessary to lubricate the mechanism and provide greater flexibility to the control.”23.

The sense of empire was expressed in a sense of difference between its individual parts. Continuing Catherine's policy, Alexander is concerned about the rapid colonization of southern Russia. From 1803 to 1805, more than 5 thousand colonists (Germans, Czechs, southern Slavs). New settlers were provided with significant benefits. Odessa, whose governor at that time was the French emigrant Duke Richelieu (the monument to Duke still adorns the city), received the status of a free port, i.e. the right to duty-free import and export of goods, and became a major trading port. The development of southern fertile lands is proceeding very quickly, and Novorossiya is becoming an important source of grain exports, primarily wheat.

After 1805, the colonization of the southern steppes developed primarily at the expense of Russian peasants: state peasants from relatively densely populated provinces (Tula, Kursk) are transferred to Novorossiya, the mass export of foreigners is stopped. While taking some steps towards decentralization, St. Petersburg did not want to give up control. An additional example of this policy can be the American epic. In the 18th century Russian sailors traded in a relatively limited area of ​​the Pacific Ocean: off the coast Sea of ​​Okhotsk and Kamchatka, reaching the Aleutian Islands and the North American coast. St. Petersburg did not respond to requests from merchant sailors to provide them with support. Only in 1799, the project of Grigory Shelekhov (1747-1795), the most dynamic of Russian merchant seafarers, was approved by Emperor Paul I 15 years after his death. A state-controlled Russian-American company was created, which received a monopoly right to trade in Pacific Ocean. The model for the statute of the Russian-American Company was the charters given in the 18th century. Dutch, English and French companies trading with India and other colonies. Alexander I, continuing his father’s work, transferred the board of the Russian-American Company from Irkutsk to St. Petersburg.

The first years of Alexander's reign, a time of dreams and talk about reforms, were a period of religious tolerance, the breadth of which becomes especially obvious when compared with the policies of Nicholas I. Among the reasons was the emperor's indifference to religion, in which he saw one of the forms of enlightening the people, interest in esotericism and mysticism. All members of the Secret Committee were, as contemporaries believed, Freemasons. Prince Alexander Golitsin was suspected of Freemasonry, with serious reasons, whom Alexander appointed chief prosecutor of the Synod, which led Orthodox Church. In 1803, the young emperor was visited by I.V. Beber, one of the most prominent Masons of his time. “What you tell me about this society,” Alexander allegedly said, convinced by his interlocutor, “forces me not only to provide him with patronage, but even to ask to be accepted as a Freemason.” According to existing contradictory versions, Alexander I was admitted to the Masonic order in 1808 in Erfurt, in 1812 in St. Petersburg, in 1813 in Paris at the same time as the Prussian king Frederick William III.

Prohibitive measures against “schismatics” were stopped by Catherine II in 1783-1785. Under Alexander, although with hesitation, the Old Believers began to receive permission to build churches, chapels, worship services and cemeteries. Historians call Alexander's time the “golden age” of Russian sectarianism. Emerging from the second half of the 17th century. Numerous sects, reflecting the intense nature of the spiritual quest of the Russian people and the intensity of religious sentiments, were persecuted even more actively than the Old Believers. Alexander I, having ascended the throne, immediately stopped persecuting them, all sectarian prisoners were released from prison, and the exiles returned. Sectarians - Khlysty, Skoptsy, Doukhobor, Molokans, etc. - got the opportunity to resettle from the internal provinces, where they were persecuted by local authorities and the hostility of the population, to the outskirts: to the Tauride, Astrakhan, Samara provinces.

The tolerance of the authorities contributed to the awakening of interest in Russian “spiritual Christianity” and sects in the capital’s high society. Special attention were attracted by the mystical sect of the Khlysty and the eunuchs who emerged from them, who taught that female beauty “devours the whole world and does not allow one to go to God, and since no means are effective against women, it remains to deprive men of the opportunity to sin.” The founder of the scopal sect, Kondraty Selivanov, after returning from exile in Siberia (1775-1796), lived in St. Petersburg (died in 1832), where he enjoyed the constant attention of high society and merchants. In 1805, Alexander I, leaving for the army, paid a visit to the founder of the skopchy. They say that Kondraty Selivanov predicted the emperor's defeat at Austerlitz.

The view of religion as an instrument of enlightenment determined to a large extent the emperor's attitude towards Lutheranism and Catholicism. “That is why,” writes the biographer of Alexander I, “Lutheran pastors and Catholic priests, as secularly educated people, enjoyed greater rights to respect in the eyes of Alexander than our Orthodox clergy. Polish priests and Baltic pastors easily achieved such privileges that Russian priests did not even dare to dream about.”24

Plans to convert Russia to Catholicism were revived, seemingly interrupted by the assassination of Paul I. One of the most active propagandists of Catholicism was Joseph de Maistre, who believed that it should begin with the conversion of a dozen aristocrats to Catholicism. Significant successes were achieved in this direction: the spiritual daughters of the Jesuits were M. Naryshkina (Chetvertinskaya), the emperor’s favorite, noble ladies - Buturlina, Golitsina, Tolstaya, Rostopchina, Shuvalova, Gagarina, Kurakina.

The liberal air of the era encouraged dreams. Alexey Yelensky, chamberlain of the last Polish king, having settled in St. Petersburg, became a follower of the Skoptchestvo and in 1804 sent Novosiltsev a project for creating a corps of state prophets. They would attach themselves to all the most important government officials and appease God with their prayers, and also proclaim the will of the Spirit of God. Elensky assigned the place of the main representative of the Holy Spirit to the Emperor to the “God” of the eunuchs, Kondraty Selivanov. The project remained in Novosiltsev’s papers; the author was exiled to a monastery. Alexander visited Selivanov a year later.

The expansion of the empire through the territories that were part of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, which was finally liquidated after the third partition, led to the inclusion of a million-strong Jewish population (at the end of the 18th century) in Russia. The Jewish question arose, which will not cease to occupy statesmen and politicians, ideologists and publicists even at the end of the 20th century.

Catherine II, having ascended the throne, was forced, as she says in her Notes, to immediately resolve the issue (it was his turn in the Senate) about a project that would allow Jews to enter Russia. Having found out that Elizabeth rejected such a proposal with the resolution: “I do not want benefits from the enemies of Jesus Christ,” the young empress ordered the matter to be postponed “until another time.” As the imperial territory and Jewish population increased, the question took on a different character. The problem of Jews entering Russia becomes the problem of their life in the empire. In 1791, the Pale of Settlement was introduced - a territory outside of which Jews had no right of residence. The Pale of Settlement included Little Russia, Novorossiya, Crimea and the provinces annexed as a result of the partition of Poland. But even in this territory, Jews had the right to live only in cities, but not in rural areas. In 1794, Catherine imposed double taxes on Jews compared to Christians.

In 1798, Senator Gavrila Derzhavin was sent to Belarus to “investigate the behavior of the Jews, whether they are exhausting the villagers in feeding them with deceptions, and to look for means so that they, without burdening the latter, can feed themselves with their labor”25. Derzhavin, as he says in his memoirs, collected information “from the most prudent inhabitants, from the Jesuit Academy in Plock, all public places, the nobility and merchants and the Cossacks themselves, regarding the way of life of the Jews...”

Senator Derzhavin presented his “opinion about the Jews” to Paul I, but the emperor ignored him. Derzhavin’s note “set into motion” under Alexander I. A committee was created. Its composition testified to the importance attached to the issue. Members of the committee were Count Chartoryzhski, Count Potocki, Count Valerian Zubov and Gavrila Derzhavin26. The committee's first decision was to invite representatives of the Jewish population to listen to their opinions on the conclusions made by Derzhavin. In 1804, the “Regulation on Jews” was developed. The Pale of Settlement was preserved, but its territory was expanded to include the Astrakhan and Caucasus provinces. Within the Pale of Settlement, Jews were to enjoy “the protection of the laws on an equal basis with all other Russian subjects.” There was a ban on living in rural areas and it was strictly forbidden to sell wine. In the first place in the regulations of 1804 are articles encouraging education. Jewish children were given the right to study in all Russian public schools, gymnasiums and universities. At the same time, the creation of Jewish “special schools” was allowed for those who wished to do so.

The Regulations of 1804 were the first act regulating the position of the Jews of the Russian Empire. Its liberality and tolerance - a sign of the times - become obvious when compared with subsequent legislation, which was continuously tightened.