The highest governing body in the Russian Empire, combining three aspects of power: lawmaking, executive and judicial functions. This is the general definition of the Governing Senate.

Despite a wide range of powers, this authority was completely subordinate to the emperor, was appointed by him, controlled and was responsible to him.

Over the centuries, its functions have changed in accordance with the instructions of the reigning persons. The establishment of the Governing Senate, its work and transformation will be discussed today.

Stages of development. Under Peter the Great

The founder of the Governing Senate is Peter I. Due to his constant traveling, which was required by the vigorous activity of the reformer tsar, he was forced to organize the work of the state machine in such a way that it would function even during periods of his long absence.

This reason was the impetus for the emergence of the Governing Senate. The date of its formation is February 19, 1711. There was no separation of powers at that time, since we are talking about an absolute monarchy, therefore the body replacing the king, who was away, was "one in three persons." He united three branches of power at once: he wrote laws, monitored their execution and punished.

After Peter I

After the death of Peter the Great, in the period from 1726 to 1730, the Senate became known as the High and lost a large share of its powers. His activities mainly extended to the financial and administrative spheres.

Under the reign of Catherine II, the Senate was divided into departments and lost its legislative powers.

Since the beginning of the 19th century, the functions of this body included supervision of the work of various state institutions. And starting from 1864, one more aspect of its activity was added - it became the highest instance of cassation. Some of the departments of the Governing Senate were engaged in the implementation of the registration of commercial transactions.

The dissolution of this instance took place on November 22, 1917, after the October Revolution. However, in the course of the events that took place during the Civil War, in the southern and eastern regions of Russia, its activities were resumed. But the period of work was short-lived and ended when Admiral Kolchak was taken prisoner. The place where the Senate met changed several times, but the main points of its deployment were St. Petersburg and Moscow.

Establishment of the Governing Senate

As already noted, this body is the brainchild of Peter I. The Tsar was not at all eager to share power with anyone just like that. The creation of the Governing Senate was a necessary measure. Those grandiose tasks that were set before the country required the improvement of the state apparatus.

But, unlike other countries, such as Sweden or Poland, for example, the Senate was by no means a body that limited the autocracy in any way.

• Firstly, this institution was not elected, its members were appointed by the king himself. And these were the closest associates, invested with the personal trust of the sovereign. Among them are such names as P. Golitsyn, M. Dolgorukov, G. Volkonsky and other eminent nobles.
• Secondly, the Senate was not an opposition structure. He was in complete submission to the royal person and controlled by her. He was also responsible to the monarch. The Senate, as it were, represented the “second self” of the sovereign, and by no means protected the interests of the aristocratic elite. And he had to obey, as the king himself. So, in one of the orders, Peter warned that those who dare to disobey the decrees of the Governing Senate will be subject to severe punishment or even death - "depending on the fault."
• Thirdly, the functions of this body at the first stage were not clearly defined. The field of his activity was subject to constant changes, depending on this or that situation. And he did what his Majesty the Emperor saw fit. In his decree, Peter determines that after his departure, the Senate should: judge without hypocrisy, not make wasteful expenses, try to farm out salt, increase Chinese and Persian trade, caress the Armenians and establish a fiscal authority. That is, the senators did not have a list of duties, they only received instructions from the king.

Secret surveillance

The formation of a new management structure dictated the need to create new positions. In March 1711, a new position was established - fiscal. His duties included:

• "Secretly oversee" all affairs.
• Learn about various crimes.
• Expose bribes, embezzlement and other "silent deeds" in court.

And also the position of Chief Fiscal, who is attached to the Senate, was established. Later, she began to sound like a fiscal general. He had four assistants. In each of the provinces there was a provincial fiscal, to whom three assistants were assigned. And in each city, depending on its size, there are one or two fiscal police officers.

The existence of such secret informers in the public service did not pass without a number of abuses and settling of scores. Moreover, until 1714, even for a false denunciation, no sanctions were provided. On the other hand, the institute of fiscals cannot be denied a certain positive influence on restoring order in institutions at the local level.

The system of prosecutorial supervision

Initially, the chief secretary was the head of the Governing Senate. Peter I was forced to appoint him because of the strife that was constantly observed at meetings. In 1720, A. Shchukin, who turned out to be unsuitable for the performance of duties of this kind, became it. After Shchukin died in 1721, the guards staff officers, who were replaced every month, were instructed to keep order at the meetings.

In 1722, the officers were replaced by the prosecutor's office, which not only supervised the Senate, but also was a system of supervision over other institutions - in the center and in the field - that carried out administrative and judicial functions.

At the head of this system was the Prosecutor General. He was also the head of the office of the Senate and oversaw this body. And not only in terms of order at meetings, but also in terms of the legality of its decisions.

The prosecutor general had an assistant - the chief prosecutor. The establishment of the post of Attorney General played a twofold role in the development of the Senate. On the one hand, supervision on his part contributed to the establishment of order in the proceedings. On the other hand, the independence of this body has greatly decreased.

Liaison with local government

The vast territory of Russia has always needed an extensive and efficient management system. Peter I also paid special attention to this issue. It was under him that the division of the state into provinces took place, as well as the gradual replacement of obsolete governing bodies - orders - with collegiums.

The signal for their formation was the establishment of the Senate. All the presidents of the newly created collegiums became its members. Thus, the direct connection of the Senate with the regions was visible.

Metamorphoses

After the death of Peter the Great, the functions of the Governing Senate underwent serious changes in the direction of their reduction. Under Catherine I and Peter II, in fact, an alternative body was formed - the Supreme Privy Council. The favorites of the Empress became its members.

This council, step by step, pulled the blanket over itself, taking over the powers of the Senate. Over time, the Senate almost completely lost its rights and was engaged in the analysis of petty cases. However, under Anna Ioannovna, the secret council was abolished by her, and the Senate was restored to its former status.

But under the reign of Empress Anna, another institution arises - the Cabinet, which becomes a kind of gasket between the Senate and the monarch. Over time, this had a negative impact on the work of the Senate. After the abolition of the Cabinet by Elizaveta Petrovna, the latter regained the status quo by her decree.

Reformation under Catherine II

Having come to power, Catherine II decided to reform the Governing Senate. She divided this body into 6 departments. Each of them was assigned to one or another sphere of state activity. This allowed the empress to make clearer understanding of the powers of the Senate. The areas of activity between the departments were distributed as follows.

• 1st department - domestic policy.
• 2nd - judicial activity.
• 3rd - supervision of provinces with a special status - Livonia, Estonia, Little Russia, Narva and Vyborg.
• 4th - the solution of military and naval issues.
• 5th - administrative affairs.
• 6th - conducting court cases.

At the same time, the first 4 departments worked in St. Petersburg, and the last two - in Moscow.

In addition, the influence of the Prosecutor General on each of the departments was expanded. In the short period of the reign of Paul I, the Senate again lost a wide range of its powers.

Under Alexander I

In the form in which the Senate existed before its abolition, it was created by Emperor Alexander I. He got the state with an outdated administrative apparatus, which he undertook to remake.

Understanding the important role played by the Governing Senate, the young tsar was aware of the fact that over time his importance had declined sharply. Shortly after his accession to the throne, Alexander by his decree ordered the senators to submit to him for consideration projects relating to the reform of this institution.

Work on the discussion of a package of necessary improvements in the work was carried out for several months. Members of the newly created Unofficial Committee, an informal body with advisory functions, took an active part in it. It included supporters of Alexander I in his undertakings of a liberal nature: Stroganov P. A., Kochubey V. P., Czartorysky A. E., Novosiltsev N. N. As a result, transformations were carried out, which are discussed below.

Work regulations

As under Peter I, the emperor himself appointed senators. Only officials belonging to the first three classes could apply for membership in this body. In certain cases, the senatorial position could be combined with some other. In particular, this concerned the military.

Specific decisions on this or that issue were to be made within the walls of the department that was authorized to decide them. But from time to time, general events were also held, involving the presence of all members of the Senate without exception. Decrees adopted by this body could only be canceled by the emperor.

New features

In 1810, Alexander I decided to create the State Council - the highest legislative body. Thus, this part of the functions of the Government Senate was abolished.

But he was left with the prerogative of lawmaking. Draft laws could be submitted to them for consideration by the Minister of Justice. Since the 19th century, he was also the prosecutor general.

In the same period, collegiums were replaced by ministries. Although at first there was confusion between the Senate and the newly created executive bodies. It was possible to bring everything into line only by 1825 - by the end of Alexander's reign.

One of the main functions of the Senate was financial. The departments were obliged to control the execution of the budget and report to the highest authorities about the identified arrears.

Another important area of ​​work was the resolution of interdepartmental property disputes. And also the Senate was engaged in the regulation of trade, the appointment of magistrates and the maintenance of the imperial armorial. As mentioned above, this body ceased to exist after the revolutionary events at the end of 1917.

Peter I became the first absolute monarch (autocrat) in the history of the Russian state. However, in some works, some of Peter's predecessors on the Russian throne are considered autocratic. But neither Grand Duke Ivan III, nor Ivan IV (the Terrible), the first in Russia to officially take the title of tsar and most actively assert his power, nor Alexei Mikhailovich, became autocratic (absolute) monarchs. For objective reasons, they could not eliminate the representative bodies (primarily the Boyar Duma) from the political arena. Only after the actual merging of all Russian lands into a single state, the separation of the tsar from the old aristocracy, and the reduction of the political role of the latter, did the complete liquidation of the boyar Duma and the Zemsky Sobors become possible. Thus, as a result of the objective maturation of internal and external objective conditions, as well as due to a favorable combination of subjective factors, autocracy (absolutism) really took hold in Russia.

After the termination of the convocations of the Zemsky Sobors, the Boyar Duma remained, in fact, the only body that restrained the power of the tsar. However, as new bodies of power and administration were formed in the Russian state, the Duma ceased to act as a body of representative power of the boyars by the beginning of the 18th century.

In 1699, the Near Office was created (an institution that exercised administrative and financial control in the state). Formally, it was the office of the Boyar Duma, but its work was led by a dignitary close to Peter I (Nikita Zotov). Meetings of the increasingly shrinking Boyar Duma began to take place in the Middle Office. In 1708, as a rule, 8 people participated in the meetings of the Duma, all of them managed various orders, and this meeting was called the Council of Ministers. This council turned into the Supreme body of power, which, in the absence of the tsar, ruled not only Moscow, but the entire state. The boyars and the judges of the remaining orders were to come to the Near Office three times a week to resolve cases.

The Council of Ministers, in contrast to the Boyar Duma, met without a tsar and was mainly occupied with fulfilling his instructions. It was an administrative council that answered to the king. In 1710 this council consisted of 8 members. All of them managed separate orders, and there were no boyars - Duma members who did not manage anything: some acted in the provinces, others simply were not convened in the Duma. And the Duma, thus, by 1710 itself turned into a rather close council of ministers (the members of this close council are called ministers in the letters of Peter, in papers and acts of that time) / 4 /.

After the formation of the Senate, the Council of Ministers (1711) and the Near Office (1719) ceased to exist.

At the beginning of the 18th century, the spiritual counterbalance to the sole power of the tsar was also eliminated. In 1700, the tenth Russian patriarch died, and the election of a new head of the Orthodox Church was not scheduled. For 21 years the patriarchal throne remained unoccupied. Church affairs were supervised by the "locum tenens" appointed by the tsar, who was later replaced by the Theological College. In the Rules of the Spiritual College (1721), the supremacy of the king's power receives legal consolidation: "The power of monarchs is autocratic, which God himself commands to obey." Consequently, the formation of the Theological College symbolized the transformation of church administration into one of the branches of state administration and testified to the subordination of the church to the king.

The king retained the functions of the highest judge in the state. He led all the armed forces. All acts of authorities, administration and courts were issued on his behalf, in his exclusive competence was the declaration of war, the conclusion of peace, the signing of treaties with foreign states. The monarch was seen as the supreme bearer of legislative and executive power.

The strengthening of the power of the monarch, characteristic of absolutism, was also expressed in some external attributes, the most important of which was the proclamation of the king by the emperor. In 1721, in connection with Russia's victory in the Northern War, the Senate and the Spiritual Synod presented Peter I with the title of "Father of the Fatherland, Emperor of All Russia." This title was eventually recognized by foreign powers and passed to his successors.

The Statute of the Succession to the Throne (1722) abolished the last remaining restriction on the monarch's power to appoint a successor to himself at that time.

The establishment of absolutism in Russia was not limited only to the liberation of the tsar from some forces holding him back. The transition to absolutism, its flourishing, necessitated the restructuring of the entire state apparatus, since the form of government inherited by Peter I from his predecessors (the tsar with the Boyar Duma - orders - local administration in the counties) did not meet the new state tasks. The absolute monarch, who concentrated all legislative, executive and judicial power in his hands, could not, of course, perform all state functions alone. He needed a whole system of new central and local bodies.

On February 22, 1711, Peter personally wrote a decree on the composition of the Senate, which began with the phrase: “The Governing Senate was determined to be for Our absences to govern ...” / 5 /. All members of the Senate were appointed by the king from among his immediate circle (initially - 8 people). All appointments and resignations of senators took place according to nominal royal decrees. The Senate did not interrupt its activities and was a permanent state body. The Governing Senate was established as a collegiate body, whose competence included: administration of justice, resolution of financial issues, general issues of managing trade and other sectors of the economy.

Thus, the Senate was the highest judicial, administrative and legislative institution, which submitted for consideration various issues for legislative resolution by the monarch.

Decree of April 27, 1722. “On the position of the Senate” Peter I gave detailed instructions on important issues of the Senate, regulating the composition, rights and duties of senators, established the rules for the relationship of the Senate with the collegiums, provincial authorities and the prosecutor general. Normative acts issued by the Senate did not have the highest legal force of the law, the Senate only took part in the discussion of bills and gave interpretation of the law. The Senate headed the system of state administration and was the highest authority in relation to all other bodies.

The structure of the Senate evolved gradually. Initially, the Senate consisted of senators and the office, later two departments were formed in its composition: the Punishment Chamber - for judicial cases (it existed as a special department before the establishment of the Justice College) and the Senate Office for Management.

The Senate had its own office, which was divided into several tables: secret, provincial, bit, fiscal and clerical. Prior to the establishment of the Senate Office, it was the only executive body of the Senate. The separation of the office from the presence was determined, which acted in three compositions: the general meeting of members, the Punishment Chamber and the Senate Office in Moscow. The Reprisal Chamber consisted of two senators and judges appointed by the Senate, who submitted monthly reports to the Senate on current affairs, fines and searches. The verdicts of the Punishment Chamber could be canceled by the general presence of the Senate. The Senate verdict (1713) determined the competence of the Punishment Chamber: consideration of complaints about the wrong decision of cases by governors and orders, fiscal reports.

The Senate Office in Moscow was established in 1722 "for the management and execution of decrees." It consisted of: a senator, two assessors, a prosecutor. The main task of the Senate Office was to prevent the current affairs of Moscow institutions from the Governing Senate, as well as the execution of decrees directly received from the Senate, control over the execution of decrees sent by the Senate to the province.

The Senate had auxiliary bodies (positions), which did not include senators, such bodies were the racket master, the king of arms, provincial commissars.

The post of racketmaster was established under the Senate in 1720, the duties of the racketmaster included receiving complaints about the boards and chancelleries. If they complained about the red tape - the racket master personally demanded that the case be expedited, if there were complaints about the "injustice" of the boards, then, having considered the case, he reported it to the Senate.

The duties of the king of arms (the position was established in 1722) included compiling lists of the entire state, nobles, ensuring that there was no more than 1/3 of each noble family in the civil service.

The positions of provincial commissars, who oversaw local, military, financial affairs, recruitment, maintenance of regiments, were introduced by the Senate in March 1711. Provincial commissars were directly involved in the execution of decrees sent by the Senate and colleges.

The establishment of the Senate was an important step in the formation of the bureaucratic apparatus of absolutism. The Senate was an obedient instrument of the autocracy: the senators were personally responsible to the monarch, and in case of violation of the oath, they were punished by death, disgrace, removal from office, and fines.

However, the creation of the Senate could not complete the management reforms, since there was no intermediate link between the Senate and the provinces, many orders continued to operate. In 1717-1722. to replace 44 orders of the end of the 17th century. colleges came. Unlike orders, the collegial system (1717-1719) provided for the systematic division of the administration into a certain number of departments, which in itself created a higher level of centralization.

Decrees of December 11, 1717 “On the staff of the Colleges and the opening time of them” and of December 15, 1717 “On the appointment of Presidents and Vice-Presidents in the Colleges” created 9 colleges: Foreign Affairs, Chambers, Justits, Revision, Military , Admiralteyskaya, Commerce, State Offices, Berg and Manufaktura.

The competence of the Board of Foreign Affairs, which replaced the Embassy Office, by decree of December 12, 1718, was to be in charge of “all kinds of foreign and embassy affairs”, coordinate the activities of diplomatic agents, manage relations and negotiations with foreign ambassadors, and carry out diplomatic correspondence. The peculiarities of the collegium was that “no court cases are judged” in it.

The chamber college carried out the highest supervision of all types of fees (customs duties, drinking fees), observed the arable farming, collected data on the market and prices, controlled the salt mines and the monetary business. The chamber college had its representatives in the provinces.

The College of Justice carried out judicial functions in criminal offenses, civil and fiscal cases, headed an extensive judicial system, which consisted of provincial lower and city courts, as well as court courts. Acted as a court of first instance in contentious cases. Its decisions could be appealed to the Senate.

The revision college was instructed to exercise financial control over the use of public funds by central and local authorities "for the sake of a decent correction and revision of all accounting matters in income and expenditure." Every year, all collegiums and offices sent account statements to the collegium according to the income and expense books compiled by them, and in case of dissimilarity, the Revision Collegium tried and punished officials for crimes on income and accounts. In 1722 the functions of the collegium were transferred to the Senate.

The Military Collegium was entrusted with the management of "all military affairs": recruiting the regular army, managing the affairs of the Cossacks, arranging hospitals, and providing for the army. In the system of the Military Collegium there was a military justice, consisting of regimental and general kriegsrechts.

The Admiralty Board was in charge of "the fleet with all naval military servants, including the maritime affairs and administrations belonging to it." It included the Naval and Admiralty Offices, as well as the Uniform, Waldmeister, Academic, Canal offices and Particular shipyard.

The Collegium of Commerce promoted the development of all branches of trade, especially foreign trade. The Board carried out customs supervision, drew up customs charters and tariffs, monitored the correctness of measures and weights, was engaged in the construction and equipment of merchant ships, and performed judicial functions.

The state-office-collegium exercised control over public expenditures, constituted the state staff (emperor's staff, states of all collegiums, provinces, provinces). It had its own provincial bodies - renters, which were local treasuries.

The responsibilities of the Berg Collegium included issues of the metallurgical industry, the management of mints and money yards, the purchase of gold and silver abroad, and judicial functions within its competence. A network of local authorities has been established. The Berg Collegium was merged with another - the Manufactory Collegium "according to the similarity of their affairs and duties" and as one institution existed until 1722. The Manufactory Collegium dealt with issues of all industry, excluding mining, and managed the manufactories of the Moscow province, the central and northeastern parts Volga and Siberia. The board gave permission to open manufactories, ensured the fulfillment of state orders, and provided various benefits to industrialists. Also, its competence included: the exile of those convicted in criminal cases to manufactories, the control of production technology, the supply of factories with materials. Unlike other colleges, it did not have its own bodies in the provinces and provinces.

In 1721, the Estates Board was formed, which was called upon to resolve land disputes and litigations, draw up new land grants, and consider complaints about controversial decisions on local and estate cases.

Also in 1721, the Spiritual College was formed, which was then transformed in 1722 into the Holy Governing Synod, which was equal in rights with the Senate and subordinated directly to the tsar. The synod was the main central institution for ecclesiastical matters. He appointed bishops, exercised financial control, was in charge of his estates, and exercised judicial functions in relation to such crimes as heresy, blasphemy, schism, and so on. Particularly important decisions were made by the general meeting - the conference.

The Little Russian Collegium was formed by a decree of April 27, 1722, with the aim of "protecting the Little Russian people" from "unrighteous trials" and "oppression" by taxes on the territory of Ukraine. She exercised judicial power, was in charge of collecting taxes in Ukraine.

In total, by the end of the first quarter of the eighteenth century. there were 13 collegiums, which became central state institutions, formed according to a functional principle. In addition, there were other central institutions (for example, the Secret Chancellery, formed in 1718, which was in charge of detecting and prosecuting political crimes, the Chief Magistrate, formed in 1720 and managing the urban estate, the Medical Chancellery).

Unlike orders that acted on the basis of custom and precedent, collegiums had to be guided by clear legal norms and job descriptions.

The most general legislative act in this area was the General Regulations (1720), which was a charter for the activities of state collegiums, offices and offices and determined the composition of their members, competence, functions, and procedures. The subsequent development of the principle of official, bureaucratic length of service was reflected in Peter's "Table of Ranks" (1722). The new law divided the service into civil and military. It defined 14 classes, or ranks, of officials. Anyone who received the rank of 8th class became a hereditary nobleman. The ranks from the 14th to the 9th also gave the nobility, but only personal.

The adoption of the “Table of Ranks” testified that the bureaucratic principle in the formation of the state apparatus undoubtedly defeated the aristocratic principle. Professional qualities, personal devotion and length of service become decisive for promotion. A sign of bureaucracy as a management system is the inclusion of each official in a clear hierarchical power structure (vertically) and his guidance in his activities by strict and precise prescriptions of the law, regulations, instructions.

The positive features of the new bureaucratic apparatus were professionalism, specialization, normativity, while the negative features were its complexity, high cost, self-employment, and inflexibility.

As a result of public administration reforms, a huge army of officials was formed. And the larger and more numerous this apparatus was, the more it was subject to the disease that is characteristic of any bureaucracy - corruption (bribery and embezzlement), which especially grows in conditions of lack of control and impunity.

To control the activities of the state apparatus, Peter I, by his decrees of March 2 and 5, 1711, created the fiscalatat (from the Latin fiscus - the state treasury) as a special branch of the Senate administration (“to cause fiscals in all matters”). The head of the fiscals - the chief fiscal - was attached to the Senate, which "was in charge of the fiscals." At the same time, the fiscals were also confidants of the tsar. The latter appointed chief fiscal, who took the oath to the king and was responsible to him. The decree of March 17, 1714 outlined the competence of the fiscals: to inspect everything that “may be to the detriment of the state interest”; to report “on malicious intent against the person of His Majesty or treason, on indignation or rebellion”, “whether spies are sneaking into the state”, as well as the fight against bribery and embezzlement. The basic principle of determining their competence is "recovery of all silent cases."

The network of fiscals expanded and two principles of fiscal formation gradually emerged: territorial and departmental. By decree of March 17, 1714, it was prescribed in each province "to be 4 people, including provincial fiscals from which ranks worthy, also from the merchant class." The provincial fiscal supervised the city fiscals and once a year "took" control over them. In the spiritual department, the organization of fiscals was headed by the proto-inquisitor, in the dioceses - provincial fiscals, in monasteries - inquisitors.

Over time, it was supposed to introduce fiscal system in all departments. After the establishment of the College of Justice, fiscal affairs came under its jurisdiction and fell under the control of the Senate, and with the establishment of the post of Prosecutor General, the fiscals began to obey him. In 1723, a fiscal general was appointed, who was the highest authority for fiscals. In accordance with the decrees (1724 and 1725), he had the right to claim any case for himself. His assistant was the Chief Fiscal.

The hopes placed by Peter I on the fiscals were not fully justified. In addition, the highest state body, the Governing Senate, remained without constant control. The emperor understood that it was necessary to create a new institution, standing, as it were, above the Senate and above all other state institutions. The prosecutor's office became such a body. The first legislative act on the prosecutor's office was a decree of January 12, 1722: "to be at the Senate the prosecutor general and the chief prosecutor, also in any collegium for the prosecutor ...". And by decree of January 18, 1722. provincial prosecutors and courts were established.

If the fiscals were partly under the jurisdiction of the Senate, then the prosecutor general and chief prosecutors reported only to the emperor. Prosecutorial oversight extended even to the Senate. Decree of April 27, 1722 "On the position of the Prosecutor General" established his competence, which included: presence in the Senate and control over the fiscals. The Prosecutor General had the right: to raise a question before the Senate to develop a draft decision submitted to the emperor for approval, to make a protest and suspend the case, informing the emperor about it.

Since the institution of fiscals was subordinate to the prosecutor general, the prosecutor's office also supervised covert undercover supervision.

The prosecutor of the collegium had to attend the meetings of the collegiums, supervise the work of the institution, control finances, consider the reports of the fiscals, check the protocols and other documentation of the collegium.

The system of supervising and controlling state bodies was supplemented by the Secret Chancellery, whose responsibility was to supervise the work of all institutions, including the Senate, Synod, fiscals and prosecutors.

Libmonster ID: RU-10383

In Peter's system of administrative reforms, the formation of the Senate occupies a central place.

At the end of the 17th century, the old Boyar Duma ceased to play a significant role in state administration. It became an obstacle to the reform activities of Peter I, activities aimed at creating and strengthening the military-bureaucratic empire.

After the arrival of Peter I in 1698 from a trip abroad, the Boyar Duma no longer met. Instead, a new institution was created - "Consilia", that is, systematic meetings of the chiefs of orders to solve various state affairs. But this newly created institution was not a sufficiently strange, flexible and permanently functioning supreme government body.

"Consilia" took place in the Near Chancellery, which dealt with issues of state revenues and expenditures and controlled the financial activities of orders. "Consilia" was not a simple continuation of the Boyar Duma, which was always under the tsar, who directly supervised its work. For the most part, orders were collected from the trip of the chiefs without the king, since Peter, constantly busy with various affairs, rarely visited the capital.

The composition of the "Consilia" differed significantly from the composition of the Boyar Duma. The meetings of the "Consilia" were attended only by the leaders of orders. Representatives of the clergy were completely absent, and of the duma boyars, only those who led the orders were present.

From the "ride of the chiefs of orders in the Near Office, they were the new highest government institution, an intermediate link between the old Boyar Duma and the Senate, created by Peter I only in 1711.

In the bourgeois historical and historical-legal literature there are conflicting opinions on the question of whether the idea and organization of the highest government institution in Russia - the Senate - were borrowed from Western Europe.

V. T. Sergeevich wrote: "... The Senate is not a Russian name, this may suggest that the institution itself was borrowed, especially if we remember that almost all Peter's institutions were written off from foreign ones. Nevertheless, we are not obliged to anyone by the Senate Borrowed only one name, and as for the essence of the matter, this institution is completely original, its own Russian, created by Peter from the Boyar Duma, on the basis of those needs and needs that Peter himself experienced in governing the state "1

VV Ivanovsky expressed the opposite opinion. He believed that the idea and organization of the Senate, with some changes adapted to Russian reality, were borrowed from Western Europe. “The Senate,” he wrote, “was established in Russia under Peter the Great in 1711, following the model of a similar institution that existed in Sweden. Studying government institutions in Sweden, Peter the Great settled on the Senate; this institution with some changes adapted to everyday life Russian life, should, in his opinion, find a convenient basis in the system of our government ... "2.

E. Berendts, who is considered an expert on the state structure and economy of Sweden, gave a negative answer to the question whether the Senate was created on the model of the State Council of Sweden. In 1710, after a ten-year stay in. Sweden, Generals Adam Weide and Golovin returned to Russia from captivity. In Sweden, they got acquainted with the structure of the Swedish central administration. From them, Peter could learn about the organization of the Swedish State Council, which during the absence of Charles XII ruled the state. But was the Senate a copy of the Swedish Council of State? Berendts doubts this. He refers to the fact that the Swedish Council of State never bore the name of the Senate, fought against the policy of Charles XII when he was in Turkey, while the Senate created by Peter enjoyed great confidence in him"

1 V. T. Sergeevich "Lectures and research on the history of Russian law", p. 833. St. Petersburg. 1883.

2 VV Ivanovsky "Russian state law". T. I, "p. 218. Kazan. 1896.

Handwritten decree of Peter I of February 22, 1711 on the establishment of the ruling Senate.

S. Petrovsky wrote: “At the present time, we can only guess with some probability that the Swedish Senate did not serve as a model, because our Senate of 1711 and subsequent years until 1718 does not resemble the Swedish one in its structure ...” 1 Next Petrovsky develops the idea that the similarity of the Senate created by Peter I with the Swedish Council of State was only external. It was caused by the similarity of the position of Russia and Sweden. Both countries experienced a long, exhausting war. Charles XII was in constant absences, and instead of him the country was ruled by the Council of State, which was given great powers. Peter also rarely visited his capital. The government of the country was in the hands of the "Consilia" and the orders, which acted uncoordinated.

This similarity in the position of both countries, which needed a strong government institution, may have led Peter to the idea of ​​establishing in Russia a higher institution with enormous powers and calling it the Senate: "The ruling Senate was determined to be" for our absences, for governance ... " 2 .

Petrovsky's statement that the formation of the Senate was caused only by the conditions of the war and the constant absences of Peter I cannot be considered correct. One can only agree with him that the similarity of the Senate of Peter I with the Swedish Council of State could only be external.

There is no direct indication in the historical literature and sources that the principles and structure of the Senate were borrowed from Sweden. Peter I was well aware of the existence in a number of Western European countries of higher state institutions, called the Senate. Correspondence was conducted with some of them (Venetian, Swedish, Polish), but there is no reason to assume a mechanical transfer of their device to Russia, since each of them had its own characteristics.

In general, it must be borne in mind that in the practice of governing the state, Peter I quite often called officials and institutions foreign names. This is how the names "minister", "governor", "office", etc. arose. There is no doubt that Peter's administrative reforms to one degree or another bore the imprint of the influence of Western Europe. The foreign names of institutions and officials indicate that Peter I, the capital reformer, sought to separate the old institutions and the procedure for their management from the new ones, although in other cases the old content was preserved under new names. Thus, Peter wanted to show the break in the continuity between the old administration and the new one he was introducing.

The Senate, as the highest authority, was established without proper preparation and plan. This reform was carried out by Peter as haphazardly as his other administrative reforms, before the formation of the colleges. If Peter wished to base the Senate he founded on the principles and structure of some of the Western European senates, then, undoubtedly, he or his closest associates would have carried out some preparation in this direction.

1 S. Petrovsky "On the Senate in the reign of Peter the Great", p. 36. M. 1875.

2 Complete collection of laws of the Russian Empire. T. IV, N 2321 (in the following footnotes - abbreviated "PSZ").

And this, of course, would have been reflected in the form of materials and references in the huge correspondence of Peter I and his employees for the first decade of the 18th century. Such materials have not been found in the archives. Consequently, it can be argued that when creating the supreme body of state power subordinate to him - the Senate - Peter I did not take any of the Western European senates as a model. But he adopted the idea that Russia needed a centralized, flexible apparatus of power along the lines of the advanced European states.

The Senate consisted of nine people, senators were appointed from representatives of the large nobility. They were supposed to head the central apparatus of power, to help the king govern the state. The internal and external situation: popular unrest and uprisings, ending wars, a tense financial and economic situation, and especially the destruction of the old central command apparatus by the provincial reform of 1708-1710 - all this together insistently demanded the creation of a new central apparatus of state power to carry out those tasks. who faced the ruling class of landlords - serfs and merchants.

Initially, the Petrine Senate in its structure and functions was in many respects similar to the old Moscow orders and had no resemblance to Western European institutions. But from the very first day of its existence, it was a bureaucratic institution, the highest central apparatus of state power.

Through the establishment of the Senate and a number of decrees, Peter I sought to organize the central state apparatus in such a way that it could eliminate the historical lack of control of local and central institutions. This lack of control led to the fact that governors and orderly officials could rob not only the population, but also the state treasury, causing damage to national interests.

In the bourgeois historical and historical-legal literature, there was a rather widespread opinion that the Senate in the first period of its organization was a temporary commission, and not a permanent body of power. Usually they refer to the decrees of February 22 and March 2, 1711, which say that the Senate was created "for our absences." Bourgeois historians and jurists interpreted these decrees formally, which led them to an erroneous conclusion. In fact, the Senate from the first day of its organization was a permanent institution, which was gradually improved. In Peter's letters and decrees to the Senate and his closest collaborators there is not the slightest hint of the temporary nature of this institution. When Peter I was in the capital, the Senate did not stop its activities.

The idea of ​​the Senate as the highest central state institution, expressed in the decree on the establishment of the Senate of February 22, 1711, was confirmed in a clear and categorical form by Peter I in his letter from Gorki dated March 11, 1711 to A. D. Menshikov, who at that time time was in Riga, commanding the army in the territory occupied by the Swedes. In this letter, Peter I reported on the measures he had taken to replenish the army with rank and file and commanders: "... to supplement the fugitives, I strongly punished the Governing Senate so that several thousand in Moscow were ready, and quite a few had already been collected, and I hope something will be fixed" 1 Further in this letter, instructions were given that the formation of troops located in the western garrisons, and artillery. At the end of the letter, Peter emphasized: "Still - well," I declare you already know that we have determined the Governing Senate, to which we have given full power, for that sake, if you please, write to you about all the requirements, and only give us knowledge about that, so that no time to waste" 2

From this letter to Pyotr Menshikov, it is clear that the Senate was the tsar's assistant, the highest authority in the entire system of the state apparatus, and not a temporary commission during the tsar's absences from the capital.

The reforms of 1708-1710 and the formation of the Senate in 1711 meant a huge step forward in the centralization and streamlining of the state apparatus. Along with the old, disparate and lost their significance, new orders were created - institutions that were more flexible and centralized.

The following structure of the state apparatus was created: the Senate - the highest administrative, judicial and controlling institution; fragments of the old orders, which either merged with the apparatus of the provincial offices or became dependent on the governors (some orders formally retained their independence, but were deprived of many functions inherent in the central apparatus); provincial centers headed by governors, to which cities and counties were assigned.

1 I. I. Golikov "Acts of Peter the Great" T. IV, p. 523. M. 1838. 2nd ed.

2 Ibid., p. 524.

In this way, a differentiated bureaucratic apparatus was created, better adapted than the old orders to extort various state duties from the population and suppress the growing resistance of the masses. This apparatus provided Peter I with an active foreign policy and the elimination of the economic and cultural backwardness of Russia.

Studying the activities of the Senate and its role in the creation and strengthening of the centralized bureaucratic apparatus of state power of landowners, serfs and merchants, it is necessary first of all to clarify the class composition of the Senate in its original form and trace the subsequent changes that took place in it, up to the formation of collegiums.

We know from the decree on the formation of the Senate of February 22, 1711, that the composition of the Senate was determined to be nine people. Of these, two were part of the Near Chancellery: Streshnev, head of the category, and Count Musin-Pushkin, head of the monastery order. The remaining seven people were predominantly from large military and civil officials: Prince Golitsyn, the governor of Arkhangelsk, later one of the representatives of the conservative opposition, a supporter of Tsarevich Alexei Petrovich; Prince Volkonsky, chief - commandant of the Yaroslavl province; Samarin, krigs - tsalmeister, since 1708 the head of the uniform office, was involved in the case of Tsarevich Alexei; Apukhtin, quartermaster general; Nephews, managing state-owned sailing factories; Prince M. V. Dolgoruky, an illiterate, for whom the sentences of the Senate were signed by Plemyannikov; Melnitsky, steward. The chief secretary of the Senate is Shchukin, who, before the formation of the Senate, was a profitmaker and president of the Izherian chancelleries.

Before the formation of the boards, the Senate did not include supreme gentlemen, or "principals", as the Senate called them in its verdicts: Prince Mentikov, Admiral Apraksin, Field Marshal Sheremetev, Chancellor Golovkin, Sub-Chancellor Shafirov, Head of the Middle Office Zotov. But the absence of these, the most influential, closest associates of Peter in the Senate did not detract from his importance as the highest government institution in the country and did not put him in a secondary position in the system of state institutions. The belonging of the senators to the big feudal landlords is undeniable. Most of them, before the formation of the Senate, occupied a high position in the state apparatus: Streshnev and Musin-Pushkin, were members of the Boyar Duma and the "Ministerial Council" in the Near Chancellery, etc. assembly of officials appointed by Peter I "without any attention to their origin and social status..." 1 .

The composition of the Senate was fundamentally different from the old Boyar Duma and the Near Office. The senators were selected by Peter I from the nobility, but according to their personal merits and abilities, and not according to their generosity and official position, as was the case with the composition of the Boyar Duma and the Near Office. Localism was dealt the last, crushing blow.

The original composition of the Senate in 1711 was not stable. Already in 1712, changes began to take place in it. In 1712 Senator Melnitsky left the Senate due to old age. In 1713, Senator Prince Golitsyn was appointed governor of Riga. From the end of April 1713, he did not attend the meetings of the Senate, although there was no decree to release him from senatorial duties.

In 1714, Plemyannikov's signature is no longer found on Senate verdicts.

In connection with the revealed abuses and embezzlement in the orders and office of the Intermanland province, several people were arrested and prosecuted, including senators Apukhtin, who ran the merchant chamber and money yards, and Volkonsky, who ran the Tula arms factory. The investigation found that they not only committed abuses in the management of state-owned enterprises entrusted to them, but also abused their power as senators, using their position for personal interests: under false names they contracted "on a cake in the Senate for the supply of provisions at an expensive price," etc. In 1714 they were dismissed from their positions, and in early 1715 they were convicted, subjected to public punishment and exiled.

Senator Samarin, who was involved in the case of Tsarevich Alexei, was taken for "guard" to Prince Menshikov by the nominal decree of Peter I of February 6, 1718; his house and all correspondence were sealed.

1 MN Pokrovsky "Russian history since ancient times". T. II, p. 314. M. 1933.

Letter of Peter I to the Senate dated May 19, 1711. The last 9 lines were written by Peter I himself.

Shortly after the arrest of Samarin, Apraksin was arrested in connection with the case of Tsarevich Alexei, who was appointed senator by personal decree of June 9, 1715. But since during the investigation the criminal connection of senators Samarin and Apraksin with Tsarevich Alexei was not established, Peter I, in his letter dated March 7, 1718, announced to the Senate that "Peter Matveyevich Apraksin and Mikhail Samarin on their business (for which they were taken were to Moscow) were cleansed and for this purpose they are now released to St. Petersburg as before for business; and for that now, command Mikhail Samarin to seal his house and order his people to be released. And what was the slander against them and how they justified themselves, a copy is attached to this" 1

After their release from arrest, Samarin and Apraksina sat for some time in the Senate (the first - until 1718, the second - until 1719). Senator Streshnev died in 1718. Prince Dolgoruky in the same year was removed from office as a supporter of Tsarevich Alexei.

Thus, before the decree of December 8, 1718 "On the position of the Senate," great changes took place in the composition of this institution. Of the nine senators appointed by decree of February 22, 1711, eight dropped out. From the original composition of the Senate, by the time the colleges were formed, only Musin-Pushkin remained. Until 1719, Ya. F. Dolgoruky and Apraksin were introduced to the Senate.

In examining the reasons for the great loss of senators, it cannot be overlooked that of the eleven senators appointed between 1711 and 1718, four were dismissed because of political unreliability and dishonesty. Although the Senate, as the highest state institution, was undoubtedly more organized and more efficient than the old Boyar Duma or the “Konsilya” that replaced it, in its original composition it did not fully correspond to the tasks that Peter I set for it. Therefore, it is no coincidence that in the decree of 8 December 1718 refers not only to a change in the structure of the Senate, but also to the indigenous; changes in its composition. "The Senate should consist of the presidents of the collegiums, except for them, no named person should enter at the present time when the councils are sent," 2 wrote Peter.

According to the decree "On the position of the Senate," only Ya. F. Dolgoruky and Musin-Pushkin entered it from its old composition as presidents of the collegiums.

Since the beginning of the organization of the Senate, all senators have been equalized in their rights. Peter’s decree said: “... to have equal votes and to sign all decrees with your own hands, that although one does not sign and testifies that it was wrong to be sentenced, then the others are invalid; it is the same for the one who disputes, i.e. to give a protest behind one's own hand in a letter... for senators to have places according to the list, who is written after whom..." 3 .

The decree of March 2, 1711 did not at all allow parochialism in the Senate, which was a common occurrence in the old Boyar Duma. Unanimity was required to resolve cases in the Senate. Senators who disagreed with the majority's decision filed written "protests." In case of disagreement of at least one senator, the case was to be transferred to a new consideration of the Senate (of course, in its old composition). If even during the second consideration of the case it was not possible to achieve a unanimous decision, the controversial issue was submitted for final resolution to the king.

Peter I demanded from the Senate speed, flexibility, independence and clarity in work.

1 "Collection of the Russian Historical Society". Vol. II, p. 369. St. Petersburg. 1873.

2 "PSZ". Vol. V, N 3264.

3 "PSZ". T. IV, N 2331.

page 44

The procedure for deciding cases in the Senate did not meet these requirements. Noticing this significant shortcoming, Peter, by decree of April 4, 1714, established that matters in the Senate should be decided by a majority of votes.

The order of the Senate had some similarities with the order of work of the old Boyar Duma and the "Consilia" of ministers in the Near Chancellery: the exact dates of the meetings were not established, which were convened as cases accumulated in the Senate's chancery; the permanent presence of any of the senators in the office of the Senate was not ensured for the current work, which was led by chief secretary Shchukin.

This shortcoming was soon noticed by Peter, and on April 16, 1714, a personal decree followed, establishing a clearer procedure for the work of the office of the Senate. Each senator was required to actively participate in the current work of the Senate. Daily duty of senators in the office was established. Duty senators were supposed to review cases, prepare questions for the next meetings of the Senate, convene senators for these meetings, send "confirmatory decrees" to the relevant persons and institutions on the timely and accurate implementation of personal decrees and senatorial sentences. Each senator was required to keep a journal where he was to record what he did while on duty. Thus, certain responsibilities were assigned to the senators in directing the current work of the Senate, and the fulfillment of these responsibilities was monitored.

However, the established procedure for the work of senators in the office of the Senate was poorly observed by them. As a result, January 20 1716 1999, a personal decree followed, which required each senator not only to visit the Senate every day during his monthly duty to comply with the order established by the decree of April 16 1714 years, but performed the work entrusted to the senator on duty, regardless of time.: "... all days to sit not only from morning until lunch, but also after dinner, if it happens ..." 1 . This meant that senators should not formally serve their monthly duty, but manage the current work of the office of the Senate, control the implementation of its decisions and quickly resolve those issues that do not require the participation of all senators. The same decree established the calendar schedule for the meetings of the Senate. Meetings were to take place three times a week: on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays.

For non-attendance at meetings without valid reasons, testified by the senators, a fine of 50 rubles was imposed for each missed day.

In the cases of the Senate for 1718, there are indications that the number of meetings of the Senate per week was sometimes not limited to three days and reached four or even five days a week. The meetings took place in different places: "... on Monday in the city, Tuesday - major's affairs, Wednesday - collegiums, Thursday in the Admiralty, Friday - in the Senate" 2 Sessions of the Senate began at 5 o'clock in the morning. "Mayor and collegiate affairs in the government house and to start everywhere at five o'clock in the morning" 3 . On certain days, the cases of only one department were heard at the meetings of the Senate.

The privileges of senators in comparison with other officials consisted in the fact that senators, if they were brought to criminal responsibility, were subject to the highest court of the Senate, bypassing the lower and middle courts, and the sentence of the Senate in their cases received legal force only after its approval by the king. The senators had no other privileges. The civil cases of senators proceeded in the usual manner through the appropriate judicial and administrative instances.

The right to denounce senators and demand a trial of them was enjoyed from all the fiscals 4 only by the chief fiscal. In the decree on the position of Chief Fiscal of March 5 1711 year it is said that the lower fiscals enjoy the same rights as the chief fiscal, "... except as the highest judge (senator. - G. A.) or the general staff cannot be called to court without the chief fiscal" 5 .

1 "PSZ". Vol. V, No. 2892

2 State Archive of the Feudal-Serfdom Era (GAFKE). "Reports and judgments of the Senate". Book. 42nd, l. 412.

3 Ibid.

4 Fiscals - officials whose duties included secret supervision over the actions of state institutions and officials and the behavior of residents. Chief Fiscal - the highest official who controlled the activities of fiscals and enjoyed the right to secretly supervise the actions of high-ranking officials.

5 "PSZ". T. IV, N 2331.

page 45

And since far from all senators were distinguished by impeccable honesty, the attitude of the Senate to the denunciations of the chief fiscal about the abuses of the senators was not only unfriendly, but also hostile.

Fiscal Nesterov in 1713 informed Peter I that senators were abusing their position for selfish purposes: "... some of them, not only according to the points given to them, do not look after others, but also themselves entered into a real abduction of your treasury under false names, which they obviously cannot renounce; what kind of justice and defense of your interests can be from them?

Having received this letter and other denunciations about the negligent and zealous performance of their duties by the senators, Peter wrote on June 12, 1713: “Gentlemen Senate! We are already informed that you did not do a single main thing on the basis of fiscal denunciations, but you are still cheating time to time, forgetting God and your souls, for this reason I am writing the last thing about this to you, if you have five, or sh, main things, if you no longer have time about which the fiscals will report to you, do not do it until November the first day and a criminal spoil], inflict the death penalty, sparing no one in that, and if you act differently in that, then this will happen to you "1

But these threats of Peter could not eradicate the abuses of the senators. Red tape in solving cases on denunciations of the fiscals continued as before. Therefore, by order of Peter, cases of abuses of individual senators were removed from the jurisdiction of the Senate and transferred to special courts, composed of senators and officers of the guards or only of guards officers.

These emergency courts were appointed by personal decrees. So, for example, to investigate the fiscal reports against Senator Apraksin, an emergency investigative troika was created, which included a guard officer: Major Saltykov, Captain Panin, Captain-Lieutenant Golenishchev-Kutuzov. Apraksin was accused of the following crimes: "unrevealed purchase of flax in the city of Pskov, overseas vacation and concealment of duties"; in the translation with Karavaev from the Arkhangelsk province to the Kazan province of peasants "not a small number and non-payment of any state taxes from these peasants"; in the reduction of tax payments without a senators' verdict for that, "for friendship with Privy Councilor Dolgorukov from his Yurkovsky volosts, folding incomes are not small" 2 etc.

According to fiscal reports about the abuses of Senator Ya. F. Dolgoruky, by order of Peter I, an investigative commission was created from officers of the guard, chaired by the Life Guards Major Dmitriev-Mamonov, consisting of Captain Likharev and Lieutenant Bakhmetyev. Senator Ya. F. Dolgoruky was accused of the following crimes: giving three contracts for the supply of cloth to "foreigners and accepting bad cloth from them"; in the dacha on his own behalf for the Siberian cake "official fifty thousand rubles" 3 ; in bribes from foreign contractors; in hiding from the service of officers, etc. This commission did not finish the investigation and, by order of Peter I, transferred it to a new commission, chaired by the chief secretary of the Senate Shchukin, to which, by a Senate verdict of January 21, officers of the Semenovsky regiment guards were seconded : lieutenant and ensign. By a Senate verdict of January 3, 1718, the clerk Philip Klyucharev was appointed to this commission. Shchukin was appointed at the head of this commission of inquiry, not only as a representative of the Senate, but as a confidant of Peter I.

Senators were interrogated not in the premises of the commission of inquiry, but in the office of the Senate, where the commission of inquiry came in full force. Such an order of interrogation of senators was their privilege as especially important officials. If a senator was accused of a serious crime, then Peter I personally appointed a special composition of the court from senators, generals and officers of the guard, which was called the "Supreme Court". The tsar himself was present at the investigation in such cases, and the verdict of the "High Court" received final force and was carried out only after it was approved by Peter.

In addition to the privileges enjoyed by the senators in the event of their prosecution, "the senators formally had no other legal advantages. But the senators themselves created illegal privileges, using their high position for personal purposes. The senators had a poorly developed sense of responsibility and public debt despite the persistent attempts of Peter I to instill in them, as the highest state officials, these qualities, among them the traditions of irresponsibility and lack of control, so characteristic of the old prikaz apparatus, were still quite strong.

1 "Collection of the Russian Historical Society" T XI. SPB. 1873.

2 GAFKE "Reports and sentences of the Senate". Book. 51st, l. 42.

3 Ibid.

page 46

Bribery, embezzlement and official crimes were commonplace for the state apparatus of the Petrine era. Senators in this respect did not differ from other officials.

Under the Senate, Peter I created the institution of provincial commissars in order to satisfy the urgent need for leadership in the newly formed provincial institutions. Even the predecessor of the Senate - the Near Office was in dire need of regular receipt of information from the provinces on various issues of public administration.

The personal decree of February 22, 1711 on the organization of the Senate very clearly, briefly and clearly refers to the provincial commissars under the Senate and their appointment: "... also from all the provinces in the above-described "court-Senate" for questioning and adopting decrees, there should be two provincial commissioner. 1 In fact, the rights, duties and competence of provincial commissars were much broader than it was determined by the decree of February 22, 1711. This is understandable, if we keep in mind that all the administrative reforms of Peter I before the formation of the collegiums were carried out without a definite plan.

In order to understand the rights and duties of provincial commissars and to understand their purpose in the system of the Petrine administration, it is necessary to study their practical work and attitude towards the Senate and governors.

For the management of provincial institutions by the Senate and to verify their compliance with government orders, a constant submission of various information and reports from the province was required. But a great obstacle to this was the huge distance separating the capital from the provincial centers, the poor condition of the roads and the old feudal traditions of the local administration. Peter I perfectly took into account these difficulties. In a letter to Menshikov dated February 6, 1711, he wrote about the slow implementation of the decrees by the governors: "... until now, God knows what sadness I am in, because the governors will follow the origin of their affairs, which the deadline is on Thursday in the first week, and then I will not act with a word, but with my hands to act with them "2.

The establishment of provincial commissars under the Senate was caused by the need of the Senate for the fastest communication with the provinces and for checking the implementation of various orders by the governors.

The functions of the provincial commissars were defined in the Senate's verdict of March 16, 1711, which ordered the provincial commissars to be with the Senate. to tell them to receive decrees and to ask about the affairs that are necessary for those provinces, they were always non-stop; letters and knowledge about all kinds of provincial affairs, for sending to the governors quickly and receiving answers, give them with receipts, and send them those orders to the governors by courier and upon receipt of an answer, submit to the office of the Senate for your own hands" 3 . To the Yamsky order, the Senate ordered to provide them with postal pit carts to ensure constant communication between the commissars and their governors. The Senate sought to ensure systematic communication with the provincial administration, which strengthened the centralization of the state apparatus.

Despite the fact that personal and Senate decrees on the position of provincial commissars under the Senate during the existence of this institution did not introduce other changes or additions to it, provincial commissars in practice significantly expanded their competence. Provincial commissars gave an answer in the Senate whether this or that decree was executed by the governor or not and why. For example, the Senate asked the commissar of the Moscow province whether six clerks were sent from this province to Riga for the army by decree. "... And the commissars of that province were told that the clerks were sent to Riga and a report about that would be submitted" 4 . The Kazan provincial commissar Pozdnyakov reported to the Senate that the governor could not send the three clerks assigned from his province to be sent to Koenigsberg to study German, nor could he contribute money for the maintenance of other clerks sent at the expense of the Kazan province. The Arkhangelsk commissar reported that two clerks from the Arkhangelsk province for teaching the German language, as well as the money allocated for this purpose, had been sent.

Sometimes the Senate, at the request of the orders and the office, bypassing the governors, turned to the provincial commissars with a demand to make payments due from the province and threatened with severe punishments. Not only the Senate, but also the heads of individual offices, with his permission, summoned the provincial commissars, demanded from them copies of the papers that they wrote to the governors about sending them money. SO, for example, the head of the contracting office, Colonel Koshelev, who was instructed to collect arrears, several times summoned provincial commissars with papers on payments from the province to the city office. After reviewing the papers, he became convinced that the commissars wrote to the governors on this issue "many times" 1 but they did not have cash for these payments.

Quite often the governors entrusted the commissars with the supply of fodder and provisions for the army and navy. Provincial commissioners were instructed to conclude contracts with contractors in the capital and monitor the implementation of these contracts. The Senate not only demanded from the provincial commissars a report on the number of recruits sent and not sent from the province, but also instructed them, after a medical examination of the recruits brought to Moscow and St. The minors with nominal lists were sent to the commissioner, who presented them to the "review" of the Senate. Fugitive peasants, found and brought to the capital, the commissars were obliged to send to their provinces, to their former owners.

Thus, the functions of provincial commissars were not limited to the transfer of nominal and Senate decrees to the provinces and the report on their implementation to the Senate. The practical activities of the commissars went far beyond the limits outlined by the decrees. To carry out a wide variety of assignments, provincial commissars needed assistants and clerical staff. To fulfill these duties, clerks were sent to them from the provinces, and the Senate appointed them 10 soldiers each for parcels. Thus, a small administrative apparatus was created around the provincial commissars.

Provincial commissioners under the Sonata were appointed by the governors and confirmed by the Senate. They were selected from courtiers and army officers. Thus, in terms of their class composition, they were feudal landowners. They had to know the work of their provincial administration well and, according to the decrees sent, "respond to all kinds of provincial statements." Appointment to the post of provincial commissar was indefinite, with an annual salary of 120 rubles in money and 60 quarters of bread.

The responsibility of provincial commissars under the Senate for failure to fulfill their duties was not regulated by decrees. But this does not mean that they did not answer to the Senate and were only a relaying authority between it and the governors. In practice, they were responsible to the Senate and for the activities of provincial institutions. Quite often provincial commissars were punished not only for their misdeeds and lack of performance; but also for the misdeeds of the governors.

In 1712, the Senate ordered that the provincial commissars daily submit written information to the office of the Senate, how many of their provinces were sent to the regiments of recruits, horses and ammunition according to the decrees of the Senate, and how many were not sent. If the commissars do not appear “on which day” and do not submit the required statements, “... they will be fined to the treasury a ruble a day each and put their hands on it” 2 . On May 14, 1715, the provincial commissars were summoned to the office of the Senate, where a decree was announced to them so that they would make copies of all contracting cases in the provinces starting from 1711 and send them during the first days of June to the contracting office. If this information is not If they were presented on time, the commissioners would be fined. The fine was one of the weaker penalties. The more severe punishment was often applied to the commissioners - right. On May 15, 1713, the Apothecary Order informed the Senate that he had for the past years, from 1710 to the first quarter of 1713, 126,944 rubles were not paid from all eight provinces. On this "report" a note was made by the Senate clerk Okounkov: "... for the right to send money to those provinces of the commissars". order on non-payment of the money due to him for the current year, the Senate issued an order "to beat those province commissars on the right until the money is sent to him in full."

In order to ensure success in foreign and domestic policy, it was necessary to strengthen the state apparatus, which would help Peter I win military victories, suppress popular unrest and uprisings, and protect the interests of serf landlords and merchants.

After the formation of the Senate, with his direct participation, further reforms were carried out, including administrative ones, but more systematically, according to a predetermined plan. With the help of the Senate, the positions of the military-bureaucratic empire of Peter I were strengthened, further centralization and bureaucratization of the state apparatus in all its links was carried out.

Peter's transformations did not change the class essence of the state apparatus. Lenin points out that different forms of government are only different forms of the class struggle, and each of these forms "... passes through various stages in the development of its class content, and on the other hand, the transition from one form to another does not in the least eliminate ) the rule of the former exploiting classes with a different shell. For example, the Russian autocracy of the 17th century - with the boyar Duma and the boyar aristocracy - is not like the autocracy of the 18th century with its bureaucracy, service estates ... "2.

Search publisher's materials in systems: Libmonster (worldwide) . Google. Yandex

Many radical transformations took place in the country: the way of life of the people changed, the fleet was rebuilt, the army was armed, but its main reforms concerned public administration. It was he who initiated the establishment of the highest administrative body, which was called the Governing Senate.

Founding history

With all the absolutism of power that was inherent in that period, the emperor decided to transfer some of his powers into the hands of elected and close people. At first, this practice was of a non-permanent nature, and meetings were held only during the frequent absences of the emperor.

By an official decree of Peter the Great, the Governing Senate was established in 1711. It did not arise from scratch, the predecessor was the historically outdated boyar duma. The new and bold state demanded order in the legislative and administrative structure, "truth and justice between the people and in state affairs." These duties were assigned by the emperor to the new authority.

The question of foreign borrowing

Many historians associate the creation of the Governing Senate (date of the event - February 19, 1711) with the emperor's practice of adopting everything Western. However, besides the foreign word, there was nothing foreign in the new authority, all its structure and functions proceeded only from Russian reality. This was immediately evident from the system of subordination: if, for example, in Sweden the Senate could dictate its opinion and will to the monarch, then under Peter such a situation was simply impossible.

The emperor took as a basis only the idea of ​​European states to include special institutions in the system of government and the distribution of responsibilities between different structures. The central authority was now guided not by ancient law or the customs of the ancestors, but by a common law for all. The ruling senate under Peter 1 was still an emerging institution, the main goal of which was to unite the regions under the control of one center. The emperor himself was in charge and directed all the activities of his offspring, even when he was away.

Role of the Governing Senate until 1741

After Peter's death, the central authority existed in its original form for less than one year. In 1727, Empress Catherine I issued a decree on the establishment of special supervision over him, which became the Secret Supreme Council. And the Governing Senate in Russia itself was renamed the High.

Historians attribute the reason for the creation of the supervisory body to the personal qualities of Peter's successors, who, like him, did not know how to lead with an iron hand. In practice, the senate lost its original importance, its duties now included litigation and petty government work. All this happened under the watchful eye of the Supreme Privy Council, whose members were A. D. Menshikov and F. M. Apraksin.

The situation changed with the advent of Anna Ioannovna, who abolished the controlling body, and all power was again concentrated in the hands of the Empress and the Governing Senate. A reform was carried out, the department was divided into 5 departments, a cabinet of ministers appeared, for the leadership of which Biron, Osterman and Munnich fought.

Period from 1741 to 1917

Under Elizabeth, the ruling senate again received great powers, up to legislative activity and influence on foreign policy. However, all the introductions of the Empress were canceled by Peter III. Under Catherine II, the formation of the state system of the Russian Empire continued actively. The great sovereign did not particularly trust the members of the Senate and, if possible, tried to remove certain departments from the institution and transferred them under the control of trusted people, such as Prince Vyazemsky, Shuvalov and Chernyshev.

The provision on the highest authority was finally formed during the reign of Alexander I. Immediately after accession, he seriously set about restoring the high role of the Governing Senate in state administration. The result of his efforts was the decree of September 8, 1802, which became the last legislative act that fully explains the rights and obligations of this organization. In this form, the institution existed until 1917, when it was abolished.

Structure of the Governing Senate

Initially, the structure of the central authority had a very simple structure, Peter's decrees mainly concerned his duties and procedures. But with the growing importance of the Senate in the life of the country, its tasks gradually became more complicated, a clear hierarchy of control was required. In general, the Governing Senate had the following organization:

1. The main work was carried out by senators, they were appointed by the emperor from among civil and military officials, only members of the cassation department had to have at least three years of experience in the position of chief prosecutor.
2. The institution included several departments (their number was constantly changing), joint presences and general meetings.
3. In different compositions and types, there was its own office, usually it consisted of a secret, command, provincial and discharge table.
4. Even under Peter, a “reprisal fee” was allocated, considering petitions and fiscal reports.
5. Senate offices, whose duties included the management of colleges from all over the country.

Under each subsequent emperor, the structure of the ruling senate was constantly changing, depending on the era, new departments and structures were abolished or added, a different procedure for electing and conducting office work was established.

Main functions

Over the two hundred years of the history of the central body of state power, it has undergone many changes. Gradual transformations led to the fact that the Governing Senate, whose functions were spelled out in a special imperial decree, had unique rights, including both the interpretation of laws and supervision of the activities of subordinate institutions.

1. One of its most important functions is the ability to promulgate laws or refuse to publish them officially. Council members exercised control over the normativity of state acts, carried out the interpretation of laws, it was their decision that was final.
2. The ruling senate supervised the legitimacy of the actions of ministers, ministries, provincial authorities. If violations were found, the organization had the right to demand explanations and, if necessary, punish.
3. He supervised elections to zemstvo assemblies, the State Duma, city dumas, merchant, petty-bourgeois, craft institutions, and considered complaints from the nobles.
4. The Senate had the right, in case of gross errors in the service of provincial leaders, to issue a reprimand to them and issue appropriate decrees.
5. The Cassation Department of the Governing Senate was in charge of the judicial system in Russia, and its decisions were no longer subject to appeal.

The uniqueness of the powers of the governing body also consisted in the fact that members of the council had the right to initiate criminal prosecution of higher administrative persons, county representatives of the nobility and other officials.

Features in the appointment of senators

Under Peter I, the members of the council, in addition to serving in this central organization, carried out other state assignments. Therefore, in the sources of that time one can often find mention of the meeting not being held in full force. Someone was appointed ambassador to Europe, someone went on special assignments to the county towns of the Empire, and it turned out that all the duties were performed by 5-6 people.

The main function of management was carried out by the senators in the departments, and initially they did not include outstanding people of their time, those who are able to lead with a strong hand. The fact is that, according to the existing differentiation of state ranks, persons with ranks III and IV were appointed to the position in the council, and service in the government was the height of their career for them. Thus, the social status of the members who were members of the ruling senate did not at all correspond to its high status.

Appointments were made by nominal decrees, senators took the oath, established under Peter I.

Public officials attached to a central authority

Even at the founding of the Governing Senate, a procedure was established according to which two commissioners were appointed from each province to "demand and accept decrees." It is they who should be the mediators between the regional authorities and the Senate. Their duties included not only issuing decrees, but also exercising control over execution. Later, these functions were transferred to the colleges.

The Institute of Fiscals was established in 1711, they were the supervisory authority over the actions of the courts, officials of all categories and other government officials. A very large power was concentrated in their hands, in fact, because of one denunciation, any person could be accused of a crime. Subordinate to the Chief Fiscal were several close assistants, as well as service people in every province and even city.

Even Peter I wanted to establish control over the Governing Senate, but the problem was to find such a person who could oversee the supreme body. Subsequently, the post of Prosecutor General was established here. And also it is necessary to mention the retmeister and his office, it was they who accepted petitions from all over the country and monitored the timing and quality of their execution.

Circle of departments

The establishment of the Governing Senate did not immediately solve all the problems of state administration. The list of controlled departments was formed gradually, the first decree obliged the institution to carry out the following functions:

• monitor the court and check the legitimacy of their decisions;
• control spending in the state;
• follow the collection of nobles and literate young boyars as officers, the search for evaders;
• inspection of goods;
• to bargain with China and Persia;
• control over the devastated villages.

The institution could be called the central judicial, military and financial department, which exercised oversight over certain areas of state administration.

Office work order

Even Peter I noted the inexcusable slowness of the work of the entire system of the body he created. The institution required a clear order of actions, so the institution of record keeping was gradually organized in the governing Senate. In the 18th century, the concepts of a protocol and a reporting journal were already introduced, but only the charters of Alexander II finally established the order of doing business in departments.

1. The petition, complaint or other documents are received by the office, the employees collected the necessary information, certificates and prepared a note summarizing the essence of the petition, indicating the legal grounds.
2. In oral form, the report is delivered to members of a particular department.
3. A vote is taken, and the decision, with some exceptions, was to be taken unanimously.
4. The adopted resolution is recorded by the office in the journal and, based on the results of the meeting, a final decision is drawn up.

Before the case went to the departments for consideration, all papers were read and controlled by the chief prosecutor, who had the right to make changes or influence the voting process.

Legislative activity

The ruling senate has never been completely a department that develops and issues state decrees. Only under Peter and Elizabeth were the members of the council given complete freedom of action. Over the two hundred years of its existence, its main function has taken shape - the regulation and control of administrative management.

In rare cases, the central authority could submit a draft law for consideration by the emperor and ministers, however, members of the council rarely used this right, since the department did not have enough funds and opportunities to conduct lawmaking activities. Thus, the decrees of the ruling senate regarding the terms of service of officers from the nobility were criticized and rejected by Alexander I.

abolition

From the beginning of the 19th century until 1917, the role of the Senate in public administration was the same as under Alexander I. The problem of communication with the highest authority in the person of the emperor remained unresolved, all communication took place through the chief prosecutor, and its initial great importance as under Peter I this department was never able to achieve. After the October Revolution, the council was dissolved, although temporary presences were resumed during the Civil War in Omsk and Yalta.

The establishment of the Governing Senate marked the beginning of a clear organization of government in our country, the experience of the departments in the Russian Empire was taken into account in the formation of a modern political system.

March 5, 2011 marks the 300th anniversary of the establishment of the Senate - the highest body of state power and legislation of the Russian Empire.

On March 5 (February 22 old style), 1711, by decree of Peter I, the Governing Senate was established - the highest body of state power and legislation, subordinate to the emperor.

The need to create such a body of power was due to the fact that Peter I often left the country and therefore could not fully deal with the current affairs of government. During his absence, he entrusted the conduct of business to several trusted persons. On March 5 (February 22), 1711, these powers were assigned to the Governing Senate. Initially, it consisted of 9 members and a chief secretary and acted exclusively on behalf of the king and reported only to him.

After the Table of Ranks was adopted (the law on the order of public service in the Russian Empire, which regulates the ratio of ranks by seniority and the sequence of promotion to ranks), members of the Senate were appointed by the tsar from among the civil and military officials of the first three classes.

In the early years of its existence, the Senate dealt with state revenues and expenditures, was in charge of the attendance of the nobles for service, and was an oversight body for the bureaucratic apparatus. Soon, fiscal positions were introduced in the center and in the regions, who reported on all violations of laws, bribery, embezzlement and other similar actions. After the creation of collegiums (central bodies of sectoral management), all the heads of collegiums entered the Senate, but this order did not last long, and subsequently the heads of collegiums were not included in the Senate. The Senate oversaw all colleges, except for the foreign one. The post of Prosecutor General was introduced, which controlled all the work of the Senate, its apparatus, the office, the adoption and execution of all its sentences, their appeal or suspension. The Prosecutor General and the Chief Prosecutor of the Senate were subordinate only to the sovereign. The main function of the prosecutor's control was to ensure the observance of law and order.

From 1711 to 1714 the seat of the Senate was Moscow, but sometimes for a while, as a whole or in the person of several senators, he moved to St. Petersburg, which from 1714 became his permanent seat. Since then, the Senate has moved to Moscow only temporarily, in the case of Peter's trips there for a long time. A part of the Senate office remained in Moscow.

In April 1714, a ban was issued to bring complaints to the tsar about the unfair decisions of the Senate, which was an innovation for Russia. Until that time, the sovereign could complain about every institution. This prohibition was repeated in a decree on December 22, 1718, and the death penalty was established for filing a complaint against the Senate.

After the death of Peter I, the position of the Senate, its role and functions in the system of state administration gradually changed. Other supreme state bodies were created, to which the functions of the Senate were transferred. Under Catherine II, the Senate was removed from the main legislative functions of political significance. Formally, the Senate was the highest court, but its activities were greatly influenced by the decisions of the Prosecutor General and the admission of complaints against him (despite the formal ban). Catherine II preferred to entrust the functions of the Senate to her proxies.

In 1802, Alexander I issued a decree on the rights and obligations of the Senate, which, however, had almost no effect on the real state of affairs. The Senate had the formal right to develop bills and subsequently submit them to the emperor, but he did not use this right in practice. After the ministries were established in the same year, the Senate retained the functions of the highest judicial and supervisory authority, since the main administrative functions remained with the Committee of Ministers (which became the highest executive body).

In 1872, a "Special Presence for the Judgment of State Crimes and Unlawful Communities" was created as part of the Senate - the highest political court in Russia.

By the beginning of the XX century. The Senate finally lost its significance as the highest body of state administration and turned into a body of supervision over the legality of the actions of government officials and institutions and the highest cassation instance in court cases. In 1906, the Supreme Criminal Court was established, which considered the crimes of mainly officials.

In 1917, the Special Presence and the Supreme Criminal Court were abolished.

The Senate was abolished by a decree of the Soviet government of December 5 (November 22), 1917.

The material was prepared on the basis of information from open sources