Provincial reform of 1775 judicial and police reforms. Implementation of the Provincial Reform

What is the essence of the reforms of Catherine the Great in 1775, which changed the judicial system? What the letter of commendation gave to the cities of 1785 and how the elections to the city duma were held after the 1785 reform - read in this article.

In 1775, Catherine II published "Institutions for the administration of the provinces of the All-Russian Empire." One of the goals of the reform was to disaggregate the provinces in order to increase their manageability. 300-400 thousand people lived in the new provinces, 20-30 thousand people lived in the county. The process of replacing the old provinces with new ones dragged on for 10 years (1775-1785). During this period, 40 provinces and 2 regions were formed with the rights of a province, 483 counties were allocated in them. In 1793 - 1796, eight new provinces were formed from the newly annexed lands. Thus, by the end of the reign of Catherine II, Russia was divided into 50 governorships and provinces and one region.
The province was led by a governor appointed by the monarch. The governor was subordinate not only to government agencies of the province, but also to the courts. Financial matters were in charge of the vice-governor and the Treasury, controlled the implementation of laws - the provincial prosecutor and solicitors. Issues of health care, education were in charge of the order of public charity.

The reform of 1775, supplemented by decrees in subsequent years, created a complex system of courts in the provinces, in which elective elements were widely present. Let us consider this system in more detail, starting with the lower courts.

rural court
This court dealt with cases between state peasants. In state-owned towns, where there were 1000 or more households, there should have been a village foreman, and for every 500 households there should have been a village headman and two elected verbal sorters. For villages with a smaller number of yards, their own ratios of elders and sorters were provided. For the production of the court, rural officials gathered in a prefabricated hut. The lower instance considered, on the basis of customary law, minor conflicts between peasants - “reproach”, disputes, fights. Litigation was decided by verbal sorters. In case of their disagreement, the headman and foreman took part in the court. Parties dissatisfied with the decision could choose mediators for themselves. Appeals against the decisions of the lower rural courts were submitted to the lower reprisal according to the jurisdiction.

Lower Reprisal
The lower massacre served to investigate the cases of servicemen, black-haired and state peasants. It was attended by a reprisal judge and 8 assessors, of whom two were sent to the Lower Zemsky Court for a meeting, and two to the Constituent Court, on cases related to their villages. If the lawsuit did not exceed 25 rubles, then it ended with this Massacre, while in other cases appeals were filed with the Upper Massacre. The meetings of the Lower Massacre were held three times a year, if necessary, they could be more often. The reprisal judge was determined by the Provincial Board, and the assessors were elected from different classes, except for merchants and philistines, and were approved by the governor

Top violence
The Upper Reprisal was the appellate body for cases from the Lower Reprisal. She also subordinated the Lower Zemsky Court in those regions where there was no Upper Zemsky Court. There were two departments in the Upper Massacre - for criminal and civil cases.
It consisted of two chairmen and 10 assessors (5 assessors per department), with her there were also a prosecutor, a state affairs attorney and a criminal affairs attorney. The chairmen of the Massacre were determined by the Senate on the proposal of the provincial government; the assessors were elected once every three years by those villages that constituted the jurisdictional department of the Massacre from different classes: from the nobility, from the learned class, from serving officials, from raznochintsy and villagers.

Criminal cases at the end of their decision in this place were not carried out, but were sent for revision to the Chamber of the Criminal Court. In civil cases, final decisions were made on claims below 100 rubles. In the case of claims for large sums, those dissatisfied with the verdict could complain to the Civil Chamber. The time of the meetings of the Upper Massacre and the procedure for deciding and reporting cases in it were determined on the same basis as the Upper Zemsky Court.

conscientious court
The Constituent Court consisted of a chairman and six other members elected from the class of nobles, city dwellers and peasants, two people each. He considered cases of crimes committed out of ignorance, insane, juvenile, witchcraft, sorcery, quackery and divination, complaints about illegal detention in prison, as well as
considered civil cases that were transferred to it by agreement of the parties.
The decisions of the Constituent Court could be appealed to the "highest conscientious court". In 1852, the Conscience Courts were abolished "for ineffectiveness." If the right side was disposed to transfer the case to the court of conscience, then the wrong side opposed this, and then the conscientious court could not only consider the case, but also force the resisting side to appear in court. The Ufa conscientious judge admitted that during the 12 years of his judging, 12 cases did not come to his court, because his valet, at the request of the guilty from the litigants, usually chased all the petitioners who turned to the conscientious judge.

Lower Zemsky Court
Despite its name, the Nizhny Zemstvo Court played the role of an administrative-police institution rather than a court proper. Consisted of a police captain and 2 - 3 elected assessors from the nobility and the peasantry.
The police captain was elected from among the nobles. This court was given the right to pass sentences on persons convicted of violating decency, good morals and order, they considered cases of harboring fugitive people with their return to their rightful owner. Zemsky police officer gives judicial patronage to anyone who is offended, ”read the“ Institutions for the management of the provinces of the All-Russian Empire ”. The head of the lower zemstvo court - the police captain - was subordinate to the zemstvo police, he was responsible for enforcing the law, putting into effect the orders of the provincial government. The power of the police officer extended to the entire county, with the exception of the county town, which was in the competence of the mayor (or commandant).
The Lower Zemstvo Court supervised the serviceability of roads and bridges, monitored trade and the state of prices.

County Court
The County Court consisted of one county judge and one or two assessors. All its members were elected by the county nobility. This court was in charge of all civil and criminal cases in the county; the analysis of land disputes depended on him; therefore, in case of need, he was obliged to consider on the spot disputed boundaries and boundaries together with sworn surveyors. The Uyezd Court had the right to finally decide cases below 25 rubles, but in claims exceeding this price, those dissatisfied with his verdict could transfer their lawsuit to the Upper Zemsky Court; in criminal cases, he finally decided cases, but by which the defendants were not subject to either deprivation of life or honor, or commercial execution. The full presence of the County Court was only three times a year, but sometimes it met more often due to the order of the higher authorities.
The court received decrees from the Provincial Board, Chambers and the Upper Zemsky Court, sent reports to them; he referred to the Lower Zemsky Court by decrees, but with proud reports.

Upper Zemsky Court
In each province, one Upper Zemsky Court was established, but with a large province, there could be more than one. This court was divided into two Departments, each with one chairman and 5 assessors; the first Department of the Upper Zemsky Court was entrusted with criminal cases, and the second with civil cases, but if the first Department had few criminal cases, then both of them could deal with civil litigation.
The presidents of the court were determined by the emperor from among two candidates elected by the Senate; and the assessors were elected by election from the nobility once every three years.
The Uyezd Courts and the Lower Zemsky Courts of its district were subordinate to the Upper Court, so it was an appellate instance for them. On appeal, all cases from the above-mentioned courts, complaints and lawsuits of the nobles and against the nobles, both civil and criminal, were brought into it. Also considered were cases relating to estates, privileges, wills, to the right of inheritance, lawsuits, as well as cases of those raznochintsy who, by rights of appeal to the District and Lower Zemsky Courts, were subject directly to the Upper Zemsky Court.

The Upper Zemsky Court finally resolved litigations at a cost of less than 100 rubles, while in claims exceeding this amount, those dissatisfied with its decision could transfer their cases to the Civil Chamber.
This court sat three times a year - from January 8 to Holy Week (the last week before Easter), from Holy Trinity Day (50 days after Easter - late May - early June) to June 27, and from October 2 to December 18. If necessary, meetings could be held at other times. In the period between judicial sessions in each department, two of the members sat monthly, who could neither decide cases nor make any disclosures on their own, but only submit temporary, and not final, resolutions on current cases.

City magistrate
City magistrates have existed in Russian cities since 1743, they acted as a court of first instance and were in charge of collecting taxes. After the reform, they had only a judicial function. The magistrate consisted of two burgomasters and four ratmans.
They were appointed by election from the city merchants and bourgeoisie. One burgomaster and two ratmans were allowed to take turns not being present.
The city magistrate considered all criminal and civil litigation cases of merchants and philistines of the city. His decision was final in civil cases costing less than 25 rubles, as well as in criminal cases, in which the defendants were not subject to either deprivation of life and honor, or commercial execution (trade execution - public whipping in trading areas and in other public places, introduced Sudebnik of 1497 under Grand Duke Ivan III.Beating with a whip was painful and cut the skin to the flesh.On average, a person could withstand up to 50 blows, after which he died.The Sudebnik of 1497 does not exactly regulate the number of blows - the right to determine the punishment is given to the judge, who could appoint both 10 and 400 blows with a whip, therefore the commercial execution was called the "hidden death penalty". Also under the City Magistrate was established orphan's court, who was in charge of guardianship and orphan affairs of persons of the urban estates.

provincial magistrate
The provincial magistrate was the governing body for the city magistrates and the orphan's courts of their province. He was in charge of matters relating to privileges, disputed possessions and the affairs of the whole city, as well as appeals to the city magistrates. Criminal cases had to be submitted for revision by the Criminal Chamber; in civil cases, the Provincial Magistrate had the right to finally decide cases at a cost of less than 100 rubles; in all other cases, those dissatisfied with his decision had the right to appeal to the Chamber of the Civil Court.
The magistrate consisted of two chairmen and six assessors from the merchants and burghers of the city; he also had a prosecutor, a state affairs attorney, and a criminal affairs attorney. The chairmen were determined by the Senate on the proposal of the Provincial government, while the assessors were appointed by elections from the estates with the approval of the governor-general. The Magistrate was divided into Departments of Civil Affairs and Criminal Affairs. Due to the lack of employment in the 2nd Department, both of them could deal with civil cases.

Provincial Court. Chamber of the Criminal Court
The Chamber of the Criminal Court consisted of the chairman, two advisers and two assessors. With her were the lawyer of criminal cases. The Chamber of the Criminal Court inherited the rights of the College of Justice. She was entrusted with some criminal cases and investigative crimes of positions in the province where she was established. It received for revision from the Upper Zemsky Court, the Upper Massacre and the Provincial Magistrate criminal cases that condemned the criminal to deprivation of life or honor, or sentenced him to a commercial execution. After considering each case, the Chamber sent him to the head of the province for approval and enforcement, who, for his part, reported cases that were dubious from his point of view to the Senate or the emperor. The chairmen of the Chamber were determined by the approval of the emperor on the proposal of the Senate from two candidates, the remaining members of the chambers were approved by the Senate itself.

Provincial Court. Chamber of the Civil Court
The chamber of the Civil Court consisted of a chairman and two assessors. In fact, it was a united department of Justice and Votchinnaya boards. The chamber had the right to make a final decision on cases costing less than 500 rubles. In all other cases, the dissatisfied could appeal against the decision of the Chamber to the Governing Senate. The chairmen of the Chambers were determined by the approval of the emperor on the proposal of the Senate from two candidates, the remaining members of the chambers were approved by the Senate itself.

Upper and Lower Courts
These courts dealt with the cases of officials and raznochintsy. The upper court court consisted of 2 chairmen, 2 advisers and 4 assessors. With him stood the prosecutor, solicitor of state and criminal cases. The court was divided into 2 departments - criminal and civil cases. The chairmen were appointed by the empress on the proposal of the Senate. Counselors, attorneys and assessors were appointed by the Senate. The lower court court consisted of a court judge and 2 assessors appointed by the Senate. The court examined the cases of persons who arrived in Moscow and St. Petersburg on military, court or civil service, as well as on their own affairs related to their trades or other occupations, with the exception of malfeasance. Criminal cases were subject to mandatory revision by the Criminal Chamber. In the field of civil cases, the Upper Court Court had the right to finally decide cases with a claim value of up to 100 rubles, and the Lower Court - up to 25 rubles.

In addition to the courts, the reform of 1775 formed orders of public charity, mentioned at the beginning of this article, which were in charge of the management of public schools, hospitals, asylums for the sick and insane, hospitals, almshouses and prisons. The orders consisted, under the chairmanship of the governor, of 3 members elected one by one from the nobility, the urban society of the provincial city and the villagers.

Thus, as we can see, at all levels of local government, with the exception of the provincial court, there were elected positions, and the nobles played a decisive role. Thus, the reforms of 1775 gave the nobility a class organization and a leading administrative role in the country.
Here is what the historian Vasily Klyuchevsky wrote about this:

In the provincial institutions, Catherine for the first time made an attempt to again bring the estates together for joint friendly activities. In the order of public charity and conscientious lower zemstvo courts, under the leadership of crown representatives, there were assessors chosen by three free estates: the nobility, the urban population and the class of free rural inhabitants. True, both of these institutions, as we have seen, occupied a secondary place in the structure of local government, but they are important as the first glimmer of an idea to restore the joint [after the Zemsky Sobors] activity of the estates, and this is one of the best features of Catherine's provincial institutions.

Complaint letter to cities

The next stage of the reforms took place in 1785, when on April 21, Catherine II issued a "Charter to the Cities". According to it, the management of the city economy was transferred to the City Duma, and judicial functions remained with the magistrates.
Here are the functions of the Duma:

1. deliver the necessary allowance to the residents of the city for their feeding or maintenance;
2. save the city from quarrels and lawsuits with neighboring cities or villages;
3. maintain peace, silence and good harmony among the inhabitants of the city;
4. to forbid everything that is contrary to good order and cleanliness, leaving, however, what is related to the police department to fulfill the places and people established for this;
5. by observing good faith and by all permitted means to encourage the bringing into the city and the sale of everything that can serve the good and benefits of the inhabitants;
6. to observe the strength of public city buildings, to try to build everything necessary, to establish squares, for the confluence of people at the auction, marinas, huts, shops and the like, which may be necessary for the city, beneficial and useful;
7. to try to increase city revenues for the benefit of the city and for the distribution of institutions by order of public charity;
8. to resolve doubts and perplexities regarding crafts and guilds, by virtue of the provisions made about that.

The duma consisted of the mayor and 6 vowels, which is why it was called "six-vowel".

According to this letter, the townspeople (“city society”) were divided into 6 categories according to property and social characteristics: “real city dwellers” - property owners from nobles, officials, clergy; merchants of three guilds; artisans registered in workshops; foreigners and non-residents; "eminent citizens"; "townspeople", that is, all other citizens who feed in the city by crafts or needlework.

The six-member Duma was formed from the general city duma, which, in turn, consisted of "vowels from real city dwellers, from the guild, from workshops, from nonresident and foreign guests, from eminent citizens and from townspeople." The process of formation of the city council by representatives of each of the estates was also described in the charter. This is how the guild vowels were to be chosen:

In order to make up the voice of the guild, the votes from the guild are collected every three years by each guild and select one vowel of each guild by points. Each vowel must appear at the head of the city.

Thus, elections to the City Duma were held every three years. This duma formed a six-vowel duma from its vowels. The six-member Duma was to meet at least once a week. The city head was directly elected by the "city society":

According to the force of Article 72 of institutions for cities and towns, the city head, burgomasters and ratmans are elected by the city society every three years by balls; elders and judges of the verbal court are chosen by the same society every year by balls.

It was impossible to elect to the Duma persons under the age of 25, as well as those who do not have capital, "from which the interest is below fifty rubles." In those cities where there was no corresponding capital, it was allowed to reduce the property qualification.

50 rubles of that time - is it a lot or a little? For comparison: according to the states approved by Catherine II, the minimum salaries received by copyists (paper copyists) in county institutions were 30 rubles, in provincial institutions - 60, and in central and higher institutions - from 100 to 150 rubles a year. With low prices for food, and especially for bread (ten to fifteen kopecks per pood), such a salary was not beggarly. Vice-governors, governors and vice-governors received from 1200 to 6000 rubles an annual salary, the treasury paid middle-class officials from 200 to 600 rubles a year.
That is, 50 rubles in itself was a significant amount on which one could live for a whole year.

It is widely believed that this property qualification - for a person to have capital, the interest on which is not lower than 50 rubles - left the opportunity to get out only to merchants of the first and second guilds. This point of view goes back to the works of the pre-revolutionary historian A.A. Kiesevetter. Probably, in his reflections, the word “interest” was transformed into “interest”, and 50 rubles is 1% of the amount of 5,000 rubles, which was the lower threshold for a merchant of the second guild.

Meanwhile, the practice was different. F. Seleznev in his article "The Creation of the Nizhny Novgorod City Duma (1785-1787)" writes that in the electoral documentation of 1791 and 1806. there is not a single example when the capital or annual income of a participant in the meeting of the city society was checked. On the other hand, there are direct indications that the participants in the meeting and electors, along with merchants (including the 3rd guild, whose declared capital was obviously less than 5 thousand), were necessarily townspeople, who did not declare capital at all. Nevertheless, among the electors to the Nizhny Novgorod Duma, the townspeople were a minority. In 1791 there were 20 of them against 83 merchants, in 1806 - 32 against 81 merchants.

The charter of Catherine the Great did not determine what class the head of the city should be from. The more interesting is the discovery by F.A. Seleznev in the archives a document called “The Rite of Resumption of Elections for the Future Three Years from 1792 After the Fourth Three Years of the Provincial City of Nizhny to the Merchants and Philistines.”
This document directly states that "the city's head is elected by ballot from the merchants."

Here is how he describes the election process in December 1785:

First, the city and petty-bourgeois elders (or one town elder) held a meeting of the city society (merchants and petty bourgeois), where candidates for city posts were authorized. Then the signed electoral protocol ("choice") was transferred to the city magistrate. Further, the mayor asked the magistrate whether there were among the candidates of the city society those who were on trial or for other reasons could not take office. Ratman of the magistrate answered the request of the mayor. Candidates who met all the necessary conditions, after taking communion and visiting a priest, gathered in the house of the city society. From there, at 8 in the morning, under the chairmanship of the mayor, they followed to the parish church and listened to the divine liturgy and prayer service for the health of the reigning person and her heir. In the afternoon of the same day, the candidates signed the sworn list in the presence of the mayor. A day later, at 8 am, the electors again gathered in the house of the city society under the chairmanship of the mayor, already directly for the electoral procedure.
It took place in 1785, and later, in the form of a ballot (from the Latin word ball - ball). White ("for") or black (against) balls fell into the urn. At first, one of the merchants ran for the position of the new mayor.
... in the elections on December 12, 1785, the merchant of the 1st guild Ivan Serebrennikov received the most white balls (75 for and 25 against). However, he refused to take the place of the head, since he was already an official (he was in charge of state drinking fees in the Nizhny Novgorod and Gorbatov districts).
Then they decided to make the merchant of the 2nd guild Alexei Bryzgalov, who scored 5 points less, the city head. But he also refused to manage the city economy, citing advanced years and ill health. However, he expressed a desire to entrust the correction of his position to his son, Ivan Alekseevich Bryzgalov.
From a modern point of view, the situation is impossible. But it is common for the XVII-XVIII centuries. For a merchant of that time, an elected position, as a rule, is not a desired goal, but an invoice. Therefore, as noted by N.F. Filatov, who studied the activities of the Nizhny Novgorod zemstvo hut, merchants-industrialists "tried to shift the duties of the zemstvo service onto the shoulders of their sons incapable of entrepreneurial activity." And the city community treated this with understanding. So on December 17, 1785, the “society” passed a resolution that “Ivan Bryzgalov, instead of his father, according to his trust in him, allows him to be his head.”

I would like to end this article with an episode that took place already in the reign of Nicholas I, but rooted in the reform of Catherine II. First, you should make an excursion into the history of Yekaterinburg.

In 1807, Alexander I approved the Project of the Mountainous Regulation proposed by the Minister of Finance, which awarded Ekaterinburg the status of a mountain city. This meant that from now on, the Mining Chief of the Yekaterinburg factories, along with the local inhabitants, should bear the heavy burden of responsibility for the state of the urban economy and law enforcement. This management structure was preserved, with minor changes, until 1863. At the same time, the city had, as it was supposed to according to the charter of 1785, a mayor elected by the whole society every three years. However, the mountain chief in the hierarchy was higher than the city head.

And here is the story itself:

In 1832, a merchant-Old Believer Aniky Ryazanov was elected mayor of Yekaterinburg.
Emperor Nicholas I expressed sharp dissatisfaction with the Minister of the Interior on this occasion. The Minister of Internal Affairs announced the position of the Sovereign to the Perm Governor. The Perm governor immediately ordered that the mining chief of the Yekaterinburg factories removed Aniky Ryazanov from his post. Archbishop Arkady of Perm insisted on the same.
But the mining chief of the Yekaterinburg factories, Lieutenant Colonel Protasov, ignored both direct instructions and requests from civil and spiritual authorities. And in a letter to the Minister of Finance E.F. Kankrinu reported that he did not know the rules on how to remove a person from office, elected by society.
Of course, Lieutenant Colonel Protasov could find an opportunity to please his superiors, but in this case he would lose face.
And Aniky Ryazanov continued to serve in his position and brought a lot of benefits to the city.

It should be added that the Old Believer Aniky Ryazanov was elected to the post of mayor under Nicholas I and for the second time - in 1847.
Institutions of local government created by the reforms of 1775-1785 continued without significant changes until

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Hosted at http://www.allbest.ru/

FGU VPO RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF PUBLIC SERVICE

UNDER THE PRESIDENT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

URAL ACADEMY OF PUBLIC SERVICE

CHELYABINSK INSTITUTE (BRANCH)

Faculty of State and Municipal Administration

courseworkWork

in the subject "History of public administration in Russia"

"Provincial reform of 1775: development, implementation, results"

Completed by: Vaganova O.O.

GMU group - 642

Checked by: Voropanov V.A., Ph.D. n.,

Associate Professor of the Department "State and

municipal administration"

Chelyabinsk 2010

Table of contents

Introduction
1. Development of reform
3. Results of the provincial reform
Conclusion

Introduction

The relevance of the topic is obvious: the Constitution of the Russian Federation has put the problem of self-government in the rank of one of the key problems of the formation of power in post-Soviet Russia, in connection with which the question arose about the fundamental ability of Russia to accept self-government. There is a position according to which the whole history of Russia is a history of troubles and absurdities that were created by the near-minded tsars in a slave country, therefore the historical tradition of self-government in Russia did not take shape and in the current Russian society there is no ground for the perception of self-government ideas.

Any form of local self-government is associated with solving problems designed to ensure acceptable living conditions for citizens at the local level - from digging wells and collecting community taxes to supervisory and punitive functions, maintaining religious and administrative buildings, objects of science and culture, planning megacities and maintaining their complex infrastructure.

The “professional” nature of these problems, coming to the fore, obscures the strategic importance of local self-government, which, as history has shown, since the Middle Ages, was of decisive importance for the development of civil liberties, democracy, and the civilizational effectiveness of society and the state.

Local self-government has always and everywhere been subordinate to the law.

The purpose of the course work is to study the provincial reform of Catherine II and its results.

The objectives of the course work in connection with this topic are:

Studying the prerequisites and implementation of the Provincial reform;

Study of the results of the reform.

Object of study: Provincial reform.

provincial reform Ekaterina Pugachev

Subject of research: development, implementation and results of the Provincial reform of Catherine II.

1. Development of reform

In historiography, especially Soviet, the opinion was entrenched that the provincial reform of 1775 was caused by the events of the Pugachev region, a certain main government response to the peasant war. Indeed, the criminal inactivity, negligence and corruption of local authorities showed their malfunction, failing to either prevent or extinguish the Pugachev fire in time. By the way, the empress did not condemn the system, but its unworthy representatives, who were distinguished by abuses of power. However, the reform was prepared in advance - even in the instruction to the governors of 1764, she recognized the provinces as such parts of the state, "which most of all require correction," and promised to take up this matter in due course. The defining thought of the charter is that the governor is the highest level of the regional administration, he is the representative of the supreme authority on the spot and is the "owner" and "guardian" of the province entrusted to him. Moreover, all the estates represented in the Commission of 1767 so insistently and unanimously declared their desire to manage their affairs with their elected ones. These two main reasons led to the publication on November 7, 1775 of the "Institution for the Administration of the Province".

"Institutions" consist of 2 acts, or 2 parts, published in different years, but included in the Complete Collection of Laws of the Russian Empire under one number. The first part was published in 1775, the second - on January 4, 1780 - for the first time became a single full-fledged legislative act that regulated in detail the entire system of local governments and courts, their formation, competence, and activities; in addition, he was closely connected with the realities, outlines specific ways and methods for implementing the established norms. With the statement of Catherine II that the "Institutions" were compiled by her alone, we can half agree. Indeed, the entire legislative act in the original was written by the hand of the empress. Without denying the authorship of the empress, it should be noted that she borrowed the ideological, theoretical orientation of the normative act from 2 sources: orders of noble deputies to the Legislative Commission and notes of projectors who recommended "multiplying" the network of institutions and "police guards". But no matter how numerous the sources she used, no matter how large the number of her advisers (these include: Ya.E. Sievers, A.A. Vyazemsky, P. Zavadsky, G. Ulrich, etc.), the main preliminary work on the institutionalization of the reorganization of local and administrative judiciary was carried out by Catherine II.

2. Implementation of the Provincial reform

2.1 Territorial transformations

The system created by Peter I existed almost unchanged for about half a century. Serious innovations began only during the reign of Catherine II (1762 - 1796). The peak of transformations came in the 70s of the XVIII century. By 1775, Catherine II successfully completed three difficult wars: with Poland, Turkey and with her "resurrected husband" Pugachev. With the peaceful course of life, her former desire to seriously engage in the administrative-territorial structure of Russia returned to her. Ten years earlier, in the "Instruction to Governors" of 1764, she said that such administrative-territorial units as provinces "need most of all correction," and promised to think about this issue later. The attitude of Catherine II to the system of local government that existed at that time worsened even more after the local authorities, during the wars with external and internal enemies, could not show sufficient efficiency and mobility.

The line of Catherine II on strengthening absolutism in state administration, its centralization and policeization, subordination personally to the empress was embodied consistently in the provincial reform, which was carried out in two stages.

On April 21, 1764, by the decree "Instruction to Governors", the institute of governorship, its state status and functions were improved. The decree is aimed at strengthening and strengthening the role of local government, which seemed to be a weak link, but its strengthening could affect the entire system of public administration. Catherine II proceeded from the fact that the empire as a "whole cannot be perfect if its parts remain in disarray and disarray", considered it "the most essential thing" to adapt the position of governor to the interests of the empress.

The governor is declared the representative of the imperial person, the head, master and guardian of the province entrusted to him, the executor of the imperial will, laws, ensuring the "watchful eye" compliance with and implementation of decrees, legalizations, exposing, with the help of the provincial prosecutor, liquor, bribe takers, embezzlers of public funds as enemies of the fatherland, guardianship of agriculture , as the source of all the treasures and riches of the state, about crafts, trade, maintaining peace and security of loyal subjects, managing officials of provincial, district, voivodship and affiliated offices, visiting them every three years, compiling reports, collecting taxes, etc. The governor received enormous power , customs, magistrates, various commissions, police, yamsk administrations are subordinate to him - all "civilian places", "zemstvo governments" that previously functioned outside the governor's and in the sphere of central subordination. Ignatov V.G. History of public administration in Russia. M., 2007.

In the light of the lessons of the people's war that shook the imperial regime, Catherine II resolutely rebuilt the provincial administration. On November 7, 1775, the Decree "Institution for the administration of the provinces of the All-Russian Empire" was issued, prepared with the help of noble bureaucrats A. Vyazemsky, P. Zavadovsky, M. Sievers, G. Ulrich and others.

The shortcomings of local government were stated, which did not ensure the safety of the nobles, did not prevent a people's war, could not maintain order, could not cope with mass demonstrations that were suppressed by the army:

· Provinces by that time represented too extensive administrative territories;

· These administrative districts felt a constant lack (qualitative and quantitative) of both local administrative structures and institutions, and the absence of the necessary number of provincial officials;

· In the provincial administration there were no beginnings of separation of powers and, sometimes unjustifiably, the activities of various departments and even branches of government were combined (for example, one body could exercise powers simultaneously in the field of finance, and in the field of executive power, and as a criminal and civil court).

Correction of the situation was seen in the ways of strengthening all links, including especially the local link, the entire autocratic administration.

By transforming local government in this way, Catherine intended to ensure better and more accurate enforcement of royal laws, internal security and order in the empire. The new administrative device is subordinated to this:

a) disaggregation and more than doubling of the provinces - from 23 to 51;

b) liquidation of 66 provinces as an unnecessary intermediate link between the province and the county;

c) a multiple increase in the number of counties;

d) the introduction of 19 governorships of two or three or more provinces each.

The new administrative-territorial division is designed to increase the efficiency of tax, police, judicial, and all punitive policies, based on the principle of statistical calculation: from twenty to thirty thousand souls" Buganov V.I., Preobrazhensky A.A., Tikhonov 10.A. The evolution of feudalism in Russia. M. 1980. p. 54. .

Such a criterion for dividing the territory also had its drawbacks: the peculiarities of the region's economy, its attraction to long-established commercial, industrial and administrative centers were not taken into account, and the national composition of the population was ignored. The new division was based on a compromise between two trends - the centralization and decentralization of government, and local governments (self-government) were given very broad powers and rights. Indeed, at least at first glance, in the course of the reform, there was a further redistribution of power between the center and the regions in favor of the latter, however, the degree of independence of local governments remained extremely limited, all their activities were strictly regulated, all fundamental decisions of a political nature were still were accepted in the center and it was there that the head of the province, directly subordinate to the autocrat, was appointed and reported. None of the newly created bodies of executive power or self-government had the right to establish any laws or rules on their territory, impose their own taxes, etc. All of them had to act strictly according to uniform laws developed in the center.

2.2 Administrative and judicial changes

Speaking about reforming the system of provincial administration, it should be emphasized that all 51 provinces began to have a unified administrative and judicial structure. All officials and institutions of the local administration were divided into three main groups:

1. The administrative-police included the governor, the provincial government and the Order of public charity, in the district - the district police officer, members of the Lower Zemstvo Court and the mayor.

The system of organs of the provincial administration consisted of the provincial government and the governor-general or governor who headed it.

The provincial government carried out 2 functions:

1) executive (promulgating decrees of the supreme power in the province);

2) administrative (carrying out activities of a police nature).

The governor-general or viceroy concentrated in his hands the executive-administrative and police powers. The governor-general was appointed from persons who enjoyed the special confidence of the empress. He was in charge of two or three provinces, was the overseer of the execution of laws and duties of officials, he had at his disposal the police, the garrison, as well as field troops stationed on the territory of the governorship. His duties also included taking care of the timely collection of taxes and recruits. The viceroy had the right, when visiting one of the capitals, to sit in the Senate when discussing issues of his viceroy. All government institutions of the province, as well as class courts, were subordinate to the governor. In financial matters, he was assisted by the vice-governor, and in control over the execution of laws - by the provincial prosecutor and solicitors. The provincial government promulgated and executed decrees and orders of the central government within the province; exercised control over the activities of the entire system of provincial government bodies; was in charge of the local police; kept order and security, etc.

Under the control of the Governor-General, there were 3 types of local institutions - administrative, financial and judicial. Administrative and financial ones acted in the province, judicial - in the county.

In addition to the governor-general (as chairman), the provincial government included 2 provincial councilors appointed by the central government. The provincial government was not a collegiate body, so the role of advisers was exclusively deliberative. The governor-general could and would not agree with their opinion, and in this case they were obliged to comply with the decision of the head of the local administration.

The county administration was in the hands of the nobility. The highest county body of the provincial government was the lower zemstvo court, consisting of the zemstvo police officer (or captain) and 2 assessors elected by local landowners. All these persons were elected by the county nobility. Among other things, this body belonged to the system of executive-police institutions. The police captain carried out the implementation of the regulations of the provincial government; followed the local trade; carried out activities related to maintaining cleanliness, landscaping; supervised the serviceability of roads and bridges; observed the morality and political reliability of the inhabitants of the county; carried out a preliminary investigation, while acting "zealously, with cautious meekness, goodwill and philanthropy towards the people." The lower zemstvo court was subordinate to the provincial government. The power of the police officer extended to the entire county, with the exception of the county town, which was in the competence of the mayor (or commandant).

To manage educational institutions, hospitals, orphanages and other charitable institutions, an order of public charity was formed - the most striking manifestation of the policy of enlightened absolutism. The governor himself presided over the order.

2. The second line in the system of provincial institutions was made up of financial and economic bodies: the treasury in the province, the treasury - in the county.

The Treasury Chamber, which carried out financial management and was in charge of state property, farming, the sale of salt, income and expenses, government fees, contracts, buildings, industry and trade of the province, carried out accounting and statistical work on audits - censuses of the taxable population. The Treasury Chamber included the vice-governor, the provincial treasurer, and 4 members - the director of economy, an adviser and 2 assessors. Subordinate to the treasury were the provincial and district treasuries, which kept state revenues, and were also in charge of issuing sums of money by order of the authorities.

The system of provincial judicial institutions: all-class (civil and criminal court chambers in the province), special-purpose courts (conscientious and out-of-court), class provincial and district courts.

As a result of the reform, the judicial system has become extremely complicated. Nevertheless, the newly created system was characterized by such principles of activity as collegiality, involvement (within certain limits) of the population in the administration of justice, and the elective nature of staffing the judiciary.

Two chambers became the highest provincial courts: the chamber of criminal cases and the chamber of civil cases, whose activities were of an all-class nature. In these bodies, cases were considered on the merits. Both chambers were courts of appeal reviewing the cases of lower courts. The composition of the chambers was appointed by the Senate and included a chairman, two advisers and two assessors. The decision of the Chambers could be appealed to the Senate, but only if the amount of the claim was at least 500 rubles. In accordance with Article 106 and Article 115 of the Institutions of the Provinces, the Chambers were created as bodies closely connected with the body of sectoral, judicial administration, as a local department of this department: "The Chamber of the Criminal Court is nothing more than the department ", and "The Chamber of the Civil Court is nothing more than the united Department of Justice and the Votchina Collegia ..." Gradovsky A.D. Beginnings of Russian state law. Volumes I-III. - St. Petersburg, printing house of M. Stasyulevich, 1875 (volume I), 1876 (volume II), 1883 (volume III).

Below the judiciary in the provinces there were estate courts, in which both criminal and civil cases were considered. These judicial institutions were exclusively estate bodies:

The upper zemsky court - for the nobility, county courts, noble guardians, zemstvo courts of its district are subordinate to it, for which it acts as an appellate and revision instance; his full presence consisted of two chairmen, appointed by the empress on the proposal of the Senate from two recommended candidates, and 10 assessors, elected every 3 years by the nobility of the province; at the court there were a prosecutor, a solicitor for state and criminal cases; the court was divided into 2 departments (the first was entrusted with the conduct of criminal cases; the second - civil); in civil cases, the court could resolve litigations with a claim value of up to 100 rubles, all criminal cases were subject to mandatory revision by the Criminal Chamber, the verdict was approved by a majority of votes;

· provincial magistrate - for merchants and bourgeoisie, acted as an appellate and revision authority for city courts, it consisted of 2 chairmen and 6 assessors; the magistrate was subdivided into 2 departments: civil and criminal cases; city magistrates, orphan courts and town halls were subordinate to the magistrate; he had jurisdiction over matters relating to privileges, disputed possessions, as well as appeals from lower courts; the magistrate sat 3 times a year, with the exception of Sundays and paydays;

· upper massacre - for free rural inhabitants, was established as an appeal and revision instance for the Lower massacre; its full presence consisted of 2 chairmen and 10 assessors; the reprisal judge and assessors were appointed to positions in the same way as the members of the Lower massacre - the judge was appointed by the vicegerent board from officials, and the assessors were elected by the villages of the district from various segments of the population, the governor approved their positions.

The two highest judicial instances were territorially located in the provincial city. Lower courts operated in county towns: the county court - for the nobility, finally decided only minor civil cases, the price of a claim of which was less than 25 rubles and criminal cases, except for those in which the defendants were punished by the death penalty, deprivation of honor or commercial execution; the full presence of the county court met at least 3 times a year, the city magistrate (Town Hall) - for the merchants and bourgeoisie and the lower reprisal - for free villagers.

Thus, the county court tried the cases of the nobles of the given county and was subordinate to the Upper Zemstvo Court; The city magistrate tried the townspeople and was subordinate to the provincial magistrate; finally, the Lower Reprisal, which judged the free peasants, was subordinate to the Upper Reprisal. Unlike the judicial institutions of nobles and townspeople mentioned above, the Lower Massacre was not elected, its chairman was appointed by the government.

The order of communication with other institutions was common to all courts: with higher ones - reports and reports, and with lower ones - decrees.

Judicial county estate institutions were subordinate to estate provincial, and the latter - to non-estate chambers, which acted as revision and appeal instances for all other provincial bodies. Cases were transferred from the lower court to the higher one, either on complaints from the parties, or to verify decisions made by the lower court, or to make a final decision.

The Upper (St. Petersburg) and Lower (Moscow) court courts were created in the capitals. They sorted out the cases of officials and raznochintsy. The upper court court consisted of two chairmen, two advisers and four assessors. With him stood the prosecutor, solicitor of state and criminal cases. The court was divided into 2 departments - criminal and civil cases. The chairmen were appointed by the empress on the proposal of the Senate. Counselors, attorneys and assessors were appointed by the Senate. The lower court court consisted of a court judge and 2 assessors appointed by the Senate. The court examined the cases of persons arriving in Moscow and St. Petersburg on military, court or civil service, as well as on their own affairs related to their trades or other occupations, with the exception of malfeasance. Criminal cases were subject to mandatory revision by the Criminal Chamber. In the field of civil cases, the Upper Court Court had the right to finally decide cases with a claim value of up to 100 rubles, and the Lower Court - up to 25 rubles.

In addition, special judicial places were formed in the provincial cities, the so-called special courts with special powers. Thus, some criminal and civil cases of a criminal nature were referred to the competence of the provincial conscientious court. It consisted of six assessors - 2 from each of the three estates: nobles, townspeople and unenslaved peasants. The Constituent Court was headed by a judge appointed by the viceroy. The court, on the one hand, was supposed to soften the rigidity of the law, and on the other hand, to make up for its absence. Of the criminal cases, the conscientious court considered those where the source of the crime was not the conscious will of the criminal, but a physical or moral defect, infancy, dementia, superstition, etc. From civil cases, the jurisdiction of the conscientious court included those cases with which the litigants themselves turned to it. In these cases, the conscientious court acted in such a way that it had to first of all reconcile both parties. If the reconciliation did not take place, then the case was transferred to the ordinary court. The conscientious court has been given the right to consider illegal detention in prison for more than 3 days, if the arrested person is not charged. He could give the arrested on bail. In its decisions, the Constituent Court was guided by the laws, but also took into account the moral principle, philanthropy, and mercy. Such a court turned out to be insufficiently effective, because. affairs in it were solved for decades.

Conscientious courts and orders of public charity in their composition were all-estate government institutions (or, as they began to be called, places), therefore, assessors in these bodies were selected from all 3 main classes-estates of the local society. In addition, guardianship presences were created at county estate-judicial institutions. So, at the noble district court, under the chairmanship of the district marshal of the nobility, a noble guardianship was created to manage the affairs of noble widows and orphans. Under the city magistrate, under the chairmanship of the county mayor, an orphan's court operated for the guardianship of widows and orphans of the merchants and bourgeoisie, it was established at each city magistrate, it included the chairman - the mayor, 2 members of the city magistrate and the city headman.

Control over the activities of provincial institutions was carried out by a staff of prosecutorial oversight officials, which included the provincial prosecutor, who was subordinate to the governor and two of his assistants ("solicitors"); one prosecutor and two solicitors each at the provincial class court; by the district attorney in the district, subordinate to the provincial prosecutor. The duties of the provincial prosecutor included protecting the population from illegal requisitions, monitoring the maintenance of prisoners, etc.

The main police body was the "government of the deanery". The law regulating its organization and activities was the "Charter of the Deanery, or Police", approved on April 8, 1782. In the capital cities, it was headed by the Chief of Police. The council included 2 bailiffs - for criminal and civil cases - and elected members from the merchant class - ratmans. The competence of the council: maintaining order in the city, monitored the implementation of the decisions of the administration, was in charge of urban improvement and trade, conducted a preliminary investigation and issued court decisions in petty criminal and civil cases up to 20 rubles. In provincial towns, councils were headed by police chiefs or chief commandants. Cities with more than 4,000 households were divided into parts (200-700 households), to which a private bailiff was appointed. The police department monitored the order and execution of court decisions. At the police units there was a verbal court for minor civil cases, which were resolved orally. The verbal judge was elected by the townspeople. The police units were divided into quarters, in which quarterly guards and quarterly lieutenants kept order.

3. Results of the provincial reform

The regional reform brought significant economic benefits to the nobility. significantly increased the staff of officials recruited from the nobility. The reform achieved the goal for which it was carried out: as a result of the fragmentation of provinces and counties, the provincial and county administrations were able to respond without delay to the events of everyday life in the province and county (tax collection, recruitment, detecting fugitives), and to emergency circumstances: unrest, epidemics , epizootics. The reform unified the organization of local government throughout the country, which led to the destruction of the autonomy of some outskirts (Zaporozhian Cossacks). Perhaps the main result of the regional reform was the independence of the judiciary. True, independence was not entirely complete, but it was a major step in this direction. This reform was one of those that had long-term significance. If the introduced administrative-territorial division persisted until the end of the 19th century, then the system of local institutions - until the reforms of the 1860-1870s. Catherine managed to do what in the same 18th century could not be done, for example, in Austria, Joseph II. Undoubtedly, this principle of organization gave stability to the entire political system of the country, contributed to the preservation of the empire.

Thus, as a result of the reforms of local self-government and the court, their estate-representative character was sharply outlined, expressed in the election of both the personnel of the noble estates and in the estate origin of the personnel of general non-estate institutions. Thanks to this, the nobility became the leading class in local and central administration, as an elected representative of their estate, on the one hand, and as an official appointed by the supreme power, on the other hand.

Conclusion

The “Institution for the Administration of the Provinces” of 1775 legalized a major regional reform, which strengthened the local government in the spirit of absolutism, created an extensive administrative management system, divided the administrative, financial and economic, judicial, police functions into separate provincial institutions, reflected the trend of combining local government of the state and public principles, its bureaucratization and centralization, empowering the nobility with power in the regions. The provincial reform embodied the autocratic traditionalism of imperial administration in the second half of the 18th century, a course towards strengthening the local tsarist administration, creating locally strong administrative power, a police force that would suppress any manifestations of discontent, popular uprisings, protected the empire from Western revolutionary "infection", a constitution , representative, parliamentary institutions, the likeness of the rule of law and civil society.

Thus, as a result of the reform, the class-representative nature of the local government and the court was sharply outlined, expressed in the election of both the personnel of the nobility, and in the class origin of the personnel of general non-estate institutions. Thanks to this, the nobility became the leading class in local and central government. The nobleman dominated the local government as an elected representative of his estate, on the one hand, and as an official appointed by the supreme power, on the other hand.

List of used sources and literature

1. Anisimov E.V., Kamensky A.B. Russia in the XVIII - in the first half of the XIX century. - M., 1994.

2. Buganov V.I., Preobrazhensky A.A., Tikhonov 10.A. The evolution of feudalism in Russia. M. 1980.;

3. Gradovsky A.D. Beginnings of Russian state law. Volumes I-III. - St. Petersburg, printing house of M. Stasyulevich, 1875 (volume I), 1876 (volume II), 1883 (volume III);

4. Eremyan VV, Local self-government in Russia (XII-beginning of XX centuries);

5. Ignatov V.G. History of public administration in Russia. M., 2007.;

6. History of the state and law of Russia. Ed. Kara-Murza. - M. 1999.;

7. Klyuchevsky V.O. Course of Russian history // Works. in 9 vols. T.5.M., 1989.;

8. Kamensky A.B. From Peter I to Paul I. Reforms in Russia in the 18th century. Holistic analysis experience. M., 2001.;

9. Reader on the history of the state and law of Russia. Tutorial. Compiled by Titov Yu.P. M. 1998.;

10. Chistyakov O.I., Novitskaya T.E., Legislation of Catherine II. T.1. M., 2000.

Hosted on Allbest.ru

Reform of 1708

● Magistrates became the lower courts in the cities. Their members were also elected for a term of 3 years. For these instances were provincial magistrates. They consisted of 2 chairmen and 2 assessors from among local residents.

● State peasants were tried in the lower district reprisals. There were civil and criminal cases. They were engaged in officials who were appointed by the authorities. The upper massacres became the courts of appeal for the lower ones. Cases were entered into them only on bail, which was valid for one week.

● The provincial reform established the so-called They were also built according to the class principle. They included representatives of the nobility, as well as townspeople and peasants. These courts performed the so-called conciliatory function (helped to resolve the conflict between the plaintiffs). In addition, their duty included special proceedings in relation to crimes committed by insane people or children. Cases of witchcraft were also considered here.

● In the provinces, the judicial chambers, which considered both criminal and civil cases, served as auditing and appellate instances. They reviewed the claims coming to them from the upper zemstvo courts and reprisals, as well as from the provincial magistrates. As a rule, they were accompanied by a fairly large cash deposit.

● The Senate was the highest of all judicial bodies.

So, what else is interesting about the provincial reform of Catherine 2 (year 1775)? It was then that the first attempt was made to separate the administration from the court. But she never succeeded. The governors could still influence the execution of sentences, for example, on issues of deprivation of honor or the use of the death penalty. The chairmen of the courts were appointed by the authorities, since the representatives of the estates had the right to elect only assessors. Many cases were brought before the city police authorities. In addition, acted and patrimonial justice.

Responsibilities

The principles of police administration were discussed at meetings of the established commission, before the provincial reform began. The year 1771 was marked by the completion of the project, which involved the creation of police departments in cities. They were supposed to become an apparatus for the protection of public order.

The duties of the police included the suppression of various illegal acts. For example, it could be debauchery, fisticuffs, a manifestation of excessive luxury, fast driving or disruption of order during worship and religious processions. The police also had the right to control various festivities, to monitor trade in the markets and the cleanliness of cities, rivers, food, water, and more. others

The functions of the police also included the fight against fires, robbers and vagabonds, secret meetings and other troublemakers. She also regulated the rules of trade and the maintenance of taverns. In addition, the duties of the police included control over taxation, city planning and the organization of all kinds of holidays.

Police bodies

The provincial reform of Catherine II began. The year 1775 provided for the creation of a number of special police agencies. But the draft "Charter on Deanery" was completed only after 6 years. It was published the following year. It consisted of 14 chapters and 274 articles. This charter determined the structure of the police bodies, their system, the main aspects of their activities, as well as the list of acts that were subject to punishment.

The law enforcement body of the city became the deanery council. Among his employees were ratman-advisers, bailiffs involved in both criminal and civil cases, the mayor (or chief commandant) and the police chief.

For convenience, all cities were divided into quarters and parts (the division took place according to the number of buildings). The head of the police department in the unit was the bailiff, and in the quarter - the warden. All ranks were included in the "Table of Ranks". The provincial authorities supervised police bodies. It was they who decided all issues related to the removal or appointment of posts. The police in the capitals were controlled exclusively by the Senate.

Offenses

The "Charter of Deanery" listed a number of crimes and sanctions that the police were supposed to be in charge of. Here is some of them:

● acts related to non-compliance with laws and decisions of police authorities;

● activities directed against the conduct of worship and the Orthodox faith in general;

● bribery;

● acts that violate public order;

● actions that go against the norms of decency, such as: gambling, forbidden performances, drunkenness, swearing, building without a permit, indecent behavior;

● criminal activity directed against the existing legal order, property, person, etc.

The police authorities had the right to apply sanctions to violators only for certain offenses, for example, for illegal possession of weapons, theft of property, opposition to Orthodoxy, violation of customs rules, etc. But most often the police were engaged in preliminary investigations and subsequent transfer of the collected material to the courts. The only thing she didn't work with was political crime. For this purpose, there were other bodies.

The provincial reform of Catherine II contributed to the separation of executive and judicial authorities. All estates, except for the serfs, began to take a more active part in local government. Also, each of them had its own court. In addition, the provincial reform put an end to the functioning of almost all colleges. The only exceptions were the most important - Foreign, Admiralty and Military. The duties of the liquidated collegiums were transferred to the provincial bodies.

In 1775, Catherine II carried out a reform of local self-government. Its meaning was to strengthen state power on the ground and take the entire Russian Empire under strict control.

Previously, Russia was divided into provinces, provinces and districts. Now the provinces have been eliminated. The number of provinces was increased from 23 to 50, and the population living in them decreased to 300-400 thousand people. The provinces, in turn, were divided into 10-15 counties (up to 30 thousand inhabitants each). At the head of the province was, as before, the governor, who was appointed from above. He was supposed to exercise general supervision over the activities of all officials in the territory entrusted to him. Troops were at his disposal. At the head of the county was a police captain, who was chosen by the local nobility.

A provincial government was formed that controlled the activities of all provincial institutions. Finance and economic affairs, including the collection of taxes and taxes, were handled by the Treasury. Schools, hospitals, shelters, almshouses were in charge of the Order of Public Charity (from the word “prizret” - to look after, take care of) - the first state institution in Russia with social functions.

Under Catherine II, the judicial system completely changed. It was built according to the class principle: each class had its own elective court.

The most important innovation of Catherine's reform was the restoration of the elective principle. Part of the provincial institutions and the county administration were elected every three years by the nobles. This provision was confirmed by the “Charter to the nobility”, promulgated in 1785. Self-government was also introduced in the cities. According to the “Charter to Cities” (1785), every three years the citizens elected a “general city council”, consisting of the city head and six vowels (deputies).

On this page, material on the topics:

The document that determined the direction of the new provincial reform was “Institutions for the administration of the provinces of the All-Russian Empire“ (1775).

On the eve of the reform, the territory of Russia was divided into twenty-three provinces, sixty-six provinces and about one hundred and eighty districts. The ongoing reform planned to carry out the disaggregation of the provinces, their number was doubled, twenty years after its start, the number of provinces reached fifty.

The division into provinces and districts was carried out according to a strictly administrative principle, without taking into account geographical, national and economic characteristics. The main purpose of the division was to adapt the new administrative apparatus to fiscal and police affairs.

The division was based on a purely quantitative criterion of population size. About four hundred thousand souls lived on the territory of the province, and about thirty thousand souls lived on the territory of the county.

The old territorial bodies, after a series of transformations (changes in the status of governors were carried out in 1728, 1730 and 1760), were liquidated. Provinces were abolished as territorial units.

At the head of the province was governor, appointed and removed by the monarch. In his work, he relied on provincial government, which included the provincial prosecutor and the bottom of the centurion. Financial and fiscal issues in the province were solved by treasury chamber. Health and education issues were in charge order of public charity.

Supervision of legality in the province carried out provincial prosecutor and two provincial lawyers. Solved the same problems in the county county attorney. At the head of the county administration (and the number of counties also doubled under the reform) was district police officer, elected by the county nobility, as well as a collegial governing body - lower district court (in which, in addition to the police officer, there were two assessors).

The zemstvo court led the zemstvo police, oversaw the implementation of laws and decisions of provincial governments.

Positions were established in the cities mayor.

The leadership of several provinces was entrusted general- governor. The governors obeyed him, he was recognized as the commander-in-chief on his territory, if there, at the moment, the monarch was absent, he could introduce emergency measures, directly address the emperor with a report.

The provincial reform of 1775 strengthened the power of the governors and, by disaggregating the territories, strengthened the position of the local administrative apparatus. For the same purpose, special police, punitive bodies were created and the judicial system was transformed.

Attempts to separate the court from the administration (at the provincial level) were made even in the work of the established commission (1769), at one of the meetings it was stated: "It would be better to completely separate the court and reprisal from state affairs."

It was supposed to create a four-link system of courts: county court orders - provincial court orders - provincial courts, appellate courts or reprisal chambers - the Senate (appellate instance).

The deputies proposed to make the trial public and open, but supported the creation of a definite class courts. This desire to preserve the estate system and the principles of legal proceedings ultimately prevented the separation of the judicial function from the administrative one: it was possible to protect the special status and privileges of the nobility only by strengthening administrative intervention. Nevertheless, many proposals made during the work of the established commission entered into practice and served as the basis for the reformist transformations of 1775 (in territorial division, judicial reform) and 1784-1786. (reform of colleges).

Back in 1769, a bill was prepared "About judicial places", which regulated the beginning of the judicial law of "enlightened absolutism".

It was supposed to install several types of ships: spiritual (on matters of faith, law and internal church matters); criminal, civil, police (on matters of deanery); trade, (on merchant and brokerage affairs); military: courtier (for criminal cases of court officials); special(on customs matters).

Criminal, civil and police courts were supposed to be created according to the territorial principle - zemstvo and city. In cities, in addition, were to be created shop courts.

All courts were included in a single system according to three-level subordination: county - province - province.

The judiciary was to be given the right to evaluate the decrees of the central government from the point of view of the public interest. Zemsky and city courts were supposed to be made elective, and the trial public.

All the proposals worked out by the commission were of great importance for the judicial reform of 1775.

In the course of this reform, the estate judicial system.

1. For nobles in each county, a county court was created, whose members (county judge and two assessors) were elected by the nobility for three years.

The court of appeal for the county courts was upper district court consisting of two departments: criminal and civil cases. The Upper Zemstvo Court was created one for the province. He had the right to audit and control the activities of county courts.

The Upper Zemstvo Court consisted of appointed by the emperor, chairman and vice-chairman and ten assessors elected for three years by the nobility.

2. For citizens the lowest court was city magistrates, whose members were elected for three years.

The court of appeal for city magistrates was provincial magistrates, consisting of two chairmen and assessors elected from among the townspeople (provincial city).

3. State peasants sued in the county bottom reprisal, in which criminal and civil cases were considered by officials appointed by the authorities.

The court of appeal for the lower massacre was top violence, cases in which were brought under a cash deposit within a week.

4. In the provinces were established conscientious courts, consisting of class representatives (the chairman and two assessors): nobles - for noble affairs, townspeople - for townspeople, peasants - for peasant affairs.

The court had the character of a conciliatory court, considered civil claims, as well as the character of a special court - in cases of juvenile crimes, insane and cases of witchcraft.

5. Appeal and auditing instance in the province of steel judicial chambers (on civil and criminal cases).

The competence of the chambers included the review of cases considered in the upper zemstvo court, the provincial magistrate or the upper massacre.

A substantial cash deposit was attached to the appeal.

6. Senate remained the highest judicial body for the courts of the entire system.

The reform of 1775 made an attempt to separate the court from the administration. The attempt failed: the governors had the right to suspend the execution of sentences, some sentences (to death and deprivation of honor) were approved by the governor.

The chairmen of all courts were appointed by the government (representatives of estates could only elect assessors).

A number of cases were considered by the city police authorities. The patrimonial justice continued to exist and operate.

The system of police administration was also discussed during the work of the laid commission and the project was completed by 1771. It was supposed to create police bodies in the cities, as an apparatus for protecting "deanery, peace and good morals."

The sphere of police influence covered various unlawful acts and forms of urban life: violation of order during worship, religious procession, manifestation of excessive luxury, debauchery, fast driving, fistfights.

The police censored books and controlled popular entertainment, the cleanliness of the city, rivers, water, edible products, monitored the order of trade, sanitary conditions, etc.

The duties of the police also included the organization of city guards, the fight against vagrants and robbers, fires, troublemakers and secret gatherings.

The police took measures to provide the city with food, to comply with the rules of trade in the markets, compliance with measures and weights, the rules for maintaining taverns and hired servants.

Finally, the police were entrusted with the responsibility of controlling the architectural layout of the city, organizing holidays and taxation.

The materials developed in the commission formed the basis of the "Charter of the Deanery" of 1782. According to the "Institution of the Province" of 1775, it was envisaged to create special police departments: lower zemstvo courts, led land police officers.

FROM 1779 work on the project begins “The charter of deanery“, which was completed in 1781. In 1782 the Charter was published. It was divided into fourteen chapters, two hundred and seventy-four articles.

The charter regulated the structure of police bodies, their system and main activities, a list of acts punishable by the police.

The main sources of the Charter were: "Institution about the province", materials of the laid commission and foreign police norms, and legal treatises.

The body of the police department in the city was the deanery council, a collegiate body which included: police chief, chief commandant or mayor, bailiffs of civil and criminal cases, elected by the citizens ratmans-advisers.

The city was divided into parts and quarters by the number of buildings. Part of the head of the police department was private bailiff, in the quarter quarter supervisor. All police ranks fit into the "Table of Ranks" system.

The leadership of the police was entrusted to the provincial authorities: provincial government decided all questions about the appointment and removal of police posts. Senate controlled the police department in the capitals.

The main task of the police was defined as maintaining order, deanery and good morals. The police monitored the implementation of laws and the decisions of local authorities, controlled the observance of church orders, and the preservation of public peace. She watched over manners and entertainment, took measures to preserve the "people's health", urban economy, trade and "people's food".

The police prevented petty criminal cases, making their own decisions on them, carried out a preliminary investigation and search for criminals.

The charter introduced the position private broker, which controlled the hiring of labor force, terms of employment, registered hiring. A similar position was established to control the circulation of real estate.

In petty criminal cases, the police carried out the court. In some parts of the city there were verbal courts for resolving oral complaints in civil cases and for conciliatory decisions.

The "Charter of the Deanery" listed a number offenses and sanctions relating to the jurisdiction of the police authorities.

These offenses included:

1) actions related to disobedience to laws or decisions of the police authorities;

2) actions directed against the Orthodox faith and worship;

3) actions that violate public order protected by the police;

4) actions that violate the norms of decency (drunkenness, gambling, swearing, indecent behavior, unauthorized construction, unlawful performances);

5) actions that violate the order of administration or court (bribery);

6) crimes against a person, property, order, etc.

The police could apply sanctions only for certain offenses from the listed areas: conducting disputes against Orthodoxy, non-observance of Sundays and holidays, movement without a passport, violation of brokerage rules, unauthorized carrying of weapons, violation of customs regulations and certain property crimes.

In most other cases, the police limited themselves to conducting preliminary investigations and submitting material to the courts. The police did not investigate political crimes, it was the competence of other bodies.

The punishments used by the police were as follows: a fine, prohibition of certain activities, censure, arrest for several days, imprisonment in a workhouse.

The "Charter of Deanery" actually formed a new branch of law - police law.

Chapter 27

The estate system of the 18th - the first half of the 19th centuries.

The formation of a domestic estate structure is characteristic of the era of "enlightened absolutism", which aimed to preserve the order in which each estate performs its purpose and function. The elimination of privileges and the equalization of rights, from this point of view, were understood as a "general confusion" that should not be allowed.

The process of legal consolidation of the nobility began in the Petrine era. The "Decree on Single Inheritance" prepared the unity of the property base of this estate and specifically emphasized its official function, which became mandatory (nobles were forced to serve).

The manifesto of Peter III "On the freedom of the nobility", confirming the special position of the nobility in society, abolished the obligatory service that burdened the nobility. It outlined new areas of application of the noble initiative (except for state and military service) - trade and industry.

The most important act that carried out the legal consolidation of the nobility was “Complaint to the nobility“ (1785).

Back in 1771, as a result of the work of the established commission, a project was prepared, which later became the basis of the "Charter of the nobility". In the project, the entire population was divided into three classes, the first of which is called "noble". The project developed the provisions of Catherine's "Instruction" on the special status and purpose of the nobility.

The privileges of the nobility were defined quite broadly: first of all, the provision of the Manifesto of 1762 "On the Liberty of the Nobility", on the freedom of the nobles to serve, leave the service, travel to other states, and renounce citizenship, was fixed.

The political corporate rights of the nobility were established: the right to convene and participate in provincial congresses, the right to elect judges by the nobles.

"Charter to the nobility" (full name "Charter on the rights and advantages of the noble Russian nobility") consisted of an introductory manifesto and four sections (ninety-two articles).

It established the principles of organizing local noble self-government, the personal rights of nobles, and the procedure for compiling genealogical books of nobles.

Noble dignity was defined as a special state of qualities that served as the basis for acquiring a noble title. The title of nobility was considered as inalienable, hereditary and hereditary. It extended to all members of the nobleman's family.

Grounds for deprivation of the nobility could become, only criminal offenses, in which the moral fall of the criminal and dishonesty were manifested. The list of these crimes was exhaustive.

Personal rights nobles included: the right to noble dignity, the right to protect honor, personality and life, exemption from corporal punishment, from compulsory public service, etc.

Property rights nobility: full and unlimited ownership, the acquisition, use and inheritance of any kind of property. The exclusive right of the nobles to buy villages and own land and peasants was established, the nobles had the right to open industrial enterprises on their estates, wholesale the products of their lands, purchase houses in cities and conduct maritime trade.

Special judicial rights The nobility included the following class privileges: the personal and property rights of the nobility could be limited or liquidated only by a court decision: a nobleman could only be judged by a class court equal to him, the decisions of other courts did not matter to him.

Class self-government of the nobility, regulated by the "Charter of Letters" looked like this: the nobles created a society or Meeting, endowed with the rights of a legal entity (having its own finances, property, institutions and employees).

The assembly was endowed with certain political rights: it could make representations to local authorities, central institutions and the emperor on issues of "public good".

The Assembly included all the nobles who had estates in a given province. From the number county marshals of the nobility The Assembly elected candidates every three years. provincial marshals of the nobility. The candidacy of the latter was approved by the governor or the representative of the monarch in the province.

The nobles who did not have lands and did not comprehend the age of twenty-five were eliminated from the elections. The rights of nobles who did not serve and did not have officer ranks were limited during elections. The nobles discredited by the court were expelled from the Assembly.

The assembly also elected assessors to the estate courts of the province and police officials country police.

Noble assemblies and county leaders compiled noble genealogical books and resolved questions about the admissibility of certain persons as nobles (there were about twenty legal grounds for classifying them as nobility).

The letter of grant preserved the difference between the rights of personal nobility and the rights of hereditary nobility. All hereditary nobility had equal rights (personal, property and judicial), regardless of the difference in titles and antiquity of the clan. The legal consolidation of the nobility, as an estate, was completed. The rights assigned to the nobility were defined as "eternal and unchanging". At the same time, noble corporations were directly dependent on state power (registration of nobles in genealogical books was carried out according to the rules established by the state, state officials approved the candidates for elected noble leaders, noble elective bodies acted under the auspices of state officials and institutions).

Legal status urban population as a special estate began to be defined at the end of the 17th century. Then the creation of an organon of city self-government under Peter I (town halls, magistrates) and the establishment of certain benefits for the top of the urban population strengthened this process. The further development of the trade and finance industry (as special functions of the city) required the issuance of new legal acts regulating these areas of activity.

In 1769, a draft regulation "On the middle gender of people" or legal status was developed. philistinism. This estate included: persons engaged in science and serving (white clergy, scientists, officials, artists); persons engaged in trade (merchants, manufacturers, breeders, ship owners and seafarers); other persons (artisans, tradesmen, working people). The "middle kind" of people had the fullness of state rights, the right to life, security and property. Judicial rights were envisaged, the right to inviolability of the person until the end of the trial, to defense in court. The petty bourgeois were exempted from public works, they were forbidden to be transferred to a serfdom. They had the right to free resettlement, movement and departure to other states, the right to their own intra-estate court, to equipping them with houses, the right to put up a replacement for themselves in a recruiting set.

The petty bourgeois had the right to own city and country houses, had an unlimited right of ownership to their property, an unlimited right of inheritance.

They received the right to own industrial establishments (limiting their size and the number of employees), to organize banks, offices, etc.

In preparation "Letter of Letters to the Cities" (which began in 1780), in addition to the materials of the commission, other sources were used: the Guild Charter (1722), the Charter of the Deanery (1782) and the Institution for Governing the Province (1775), the Swedish Guild Charter and the Regulations on the Broker (1669), the Prussian Craft Charter (1733), the legislation of the cities of Livonia and Estonia.

"Charter to the Cities" (full title: "Charter on Rights and Benefits to the Cities of the Russian Empire") was published simultaneously with the "Charter to the Nobility" in April 1785. It consisted of a manifesto, sixteen sections and one hundred and seventy-eight articles.

The diploma secured a single estate status for the entire population of cities, regardless of professional occupations and types of activity.

This was quite consistent with the idea of creating a "neuter kind of people." The unified legal status of the urban population was based on the recognition of the city as a special organized territory with a special administrative system of management and types of occupation of the population.

Belonging to the petty-bourgeois estate, according to the legislator, is based on diligence and good morals, is hereditary, associated with the benefits that petty bourgeoisie brings to the fatherland (belonging to petty bourgeoisie is not a natural phenomenon, like belonging to the nobility). The deprivation of petty-bourgeois rights and class privileges could be carried out on the same grounds as the deprivation of class rights of a nobleman (a complete list of acts was also given).

Personal rights petty bourgeois included: the right to protect honor and dignity, personality and life, the right to move and travel abroad.

to property rights philistinism included: the right to own property (acquisition, use, inheritance), the right to own industrial enterprises, crafts, the right to trade.

The entire urban population was divided into six categories:

1) "real city dwellers" who have a house and other real estate in the city;

2) merchants registered in the guild (guild I - with a capital of ten to fifty thousand rubles, II - from five to ten thousand rubles, III - from one to five thousand rubles);

3) artisans who were in the workshops;

4) out-of-town and foreign merchants;

5) eminent citizens (capitalists and bankers who had a capital of at least fifty thousand rubles, wholesalers, ship owners, members of the city administration, scientists, artists, musicians);

6) other townspeople.

Merchants of the 1st and 2nd guilds enjoyed additional personal rights, were exempted from corporal punishment, and could own large industrial and commercial enterprises. Eminent citizens were also exempted from corporal punishment.

The rights and obligations of artisans were regulated by intra-shop rules and the "Charter on Shops".

For urban residents, as well as for the nobility, the right of corporate organization was recognized. The townspeople were "urban society" and could gather for meetings with the approval of the administration.

Citizens elected burgomasters, assessors-ratmans (for three years), elders and judges of verbal courts (for a year).

The assembly could make representations to local authorities and oversee the observance of laws. The right of a legal entity was recognized for a city society. Participation in the society was limited by the property qualification (payment of an annual tax of at least fifty rubles) and the age qualification (at least twenty-five years old).

Created in the city general city council which included the elected mayor and vowels (one from each of the six categories of citizens and in proportion to the parts of the city).

The General City Duma formed its own executive body - six-member city duma from among the vowels, in the meetings of which one representative from each category participated. The mayor presided.

The competence of the city duma included: ensuring silence, harmony and deanery in the city, resolving intra-class disputes, monitoring urban construction. Unlike town halls and magistrates, court cases were not under the jurisdiction of the city duma - they were decided by the judiciary.

In 1785, a draft of another class charter was developed - “ Rural position “ . The document concerned the situation only of state peasants. He asserted their inalienable estate rights: the right to a free rank, the right to own movable property, the right to acquire ownership of real estate (excluding villages, factories, plants and peasants), the right to refuse to pay illegal taxes, dues and duties, the right to engage in agriculture, crafts and trade.

rural society acquired the rights of a corporation. Rural "inhabitants" could elect the executive bodies of self-government in the communities, elected the class court and came out with ideas to the local administration. Deprivation of class rights could be carried out only by court.

It was supposed to divide the entire rural population, by analogy with the urban population, into six categories, taking into account the declared capital, according to the property qualification. The first two categories (with a capital of more than one thousand rubles) were exempted from corporal punishment.

The project did not become law, but the state and legal policy towards the peasantry was clearly defined.

Peasant population subdivided into “state settler “ , owned by the state and owned lands received from the government; free peasants, renting land from nobles or the government and not being serfs;

serfs, belonging to the nobility or the emperor.

All categories of peasants had the right to hire workers, put up recruits in their place, educate their children (serfs could do this only with the permission of the landowner), engage in petty trade and handicrafts.

The rights of inheritance, disposal of property, entry into obligations for the peasants were limited.

State peasants and free peasants had the right to protection in court, and to full possession, but not disposal of the granted lands, to full ownership of movable property.

The serfs were completely subject to the court of the landowners, and in criminal cases - to the state court. Their property rights were limited by the need to obtain the permission of the landowner (in the field of disposal and inheritance of movable property). The landowner, in turn, was forbidden to sell peasants at "retail".

Free people declared Cossacks. They could not be converted into serfdom, they had the right to judicial protection, they could own small trading establishments, rent them out, engage in crafts, hire free people (but they could not own serfs), trade goods of their own production. Cossack foremen were exempted from corporal punishment, their homes - from standing.

A uniform and special military-administrative management of the Cossack troops was established: a military office, the leadership of which was appointed by the government, and the members were elected by the Cossacks.

Development noble property rights took place in line with the legal consolidation of this estate. Even in the "Manifesto of Liberty of the Nobility" the concept of real estate was expanded, first introduced into circulation by the "Decree of Uniform Succession". Yards, factories and factories were classified as real estate.

The state monopoly on subsoil and forests, established in 1719, is abolished in 1782 - the landlords receive the right to own forest land.

Back in 1755, a landowner's monopoly on distillation was established, since 1787, the nobles were allowed to freely trade in bread everywhere. In this area, no one could compete with the landowners.

The differentiation of the legal forms of noble land ownership is simplified: all estates began to be divided into two types - generic and acquired.

The order of inheritance of landowners' estates was simplified, and the freedom of the testator was expanded. In 1791, childless landowners received complete freedom to inherit real estate to any person, even those who were not members of the testator's family.

The "Letter of Letters to the Nobility" secured the rights of the nobles to engage in industrial and commercial activities, opening up new prospects for the estate.

The nobles had an unlimited right of ownership to estates of any type (acquired and ancestral). In them, they could carry out any activity not prohibited by law. They were given the full right to dispose of estates, they had full power over the serfs, at their own discretion they could impose various taxes, dues on them and use them in any work.

Legislation on entrepreneurship, the formation of a capitalist economy. In the first half of the XIX century. in all sectors of the economy, the formation of capitalist relations took place. Agriculture was definitely focused on the market: its products were produced for the purpose of marketing, the share of cash quitrents increased in the structure of peasant labor and duties, and the size of the lord's plowing increased. In a number of areas, a month developed: the transfer of peasants to pay for food, while their allotments turned into a lordly plow.

An increasing number of industrial enterprises and manufactories appeared on the estates, where the labor of serfs was used. There was a differentiation of the peasantry, the rich invested their capital in industry and trade.

In industry, the use of hired labor increased, the number of handicraft and small enterprises, and peasant crafts increased. In the 30-50s, manufactories turned into capitalist factories based on machine technology (already in 1825, more than half of the workers employed in the manufacturing industry were hired, mostly quitrent peasants). The demand for free labor force grew rapidly.

Its replenishment, it was possible to carry out only from the peasant environment, for which it was necessary to carry out certain legal transformations in the position of the peasantry.

In 1803 it is accepted "Decree on free ploughmen", according to which the landlords received the right to release their peasants into the wild for a ransom established by the landowners themselves. In almost sixty years of the decree (before the reform of 1861), only about five hundred emancipation treaties were approved, and about one hundred and twelve thousand people became free cultivators. The release was carried out with the sanction of the Ministry of the Interior, the peasants received property rights to real estate and participation in obligations.

Published in 1842 “Decree on obligated peasants“, providing for the possibility of landlords transferring land to peasants for lease, for which the peasants were obliged to fulfill the obligations stipulated by the contract, to submit to the court of the landowner. Only about twenty-seven thousand peasants living on the estates of only six landowners were transferred to the position of "obliged" peasants. Arrears from the peasants were collected through the police by "provincial administrations".

Both of these partial reforms did not resolve the issue of changing economic relations in agriculture, although they outlined the mechanism of agrarian reform (buyout, the state of "temporary duty", working off), which was carried out in 1861.

More radical were the legal measures taken in the Estonian, Livonian and Courland provinces: in 1816-1819. the peasants of these regions were freed from serfdom without land. The peasants switched to lease relations, using the landowners' land, performing duties and submitting to the landowner's court.

A measure aimed at changing serf relations was the organization military settlements, in which, since 1816, state peasants began to be accommodated. By 1825 their number reached four hundred thousand people. The settlers were obliged to engage in agriculture (giving half of the crop to the state) and to perform military service. They were forbidden to trade, go to work, their life was regulated by the Military Charter. This measure could not give free hands for the development of industry, but outlined ways for organizing forced labor in agriculture, which would be used by the state much later.

In 1847 it was created ministry of state property, who was entrusted with the management of the state peasants: quitrent taxation was streamlined, the land allotments of the peasants were increased; the system of peasant self-government was fixed: parish gathering - volost administration -rural gathering - village elder. This model of self-government will be used for a long time both in the system of communal and future collective-farm organization, however, becoming a factor restraining the departure of peasants to the city and the processes of property differentiation of the peasantry.

New economic relations required, however, changes in the legal status of the rural inhabitants. Separate steps in this direction were made in the first half of the 19th century. As early as 1801, state peasants were allowed to buy land from landlords.

In 1818, a decree was adopted allowing all peasants (including landlords) to establish factories and plants.

The need for free wage labor made it inefficient to use the labor of sessional peasants in factories: in 1840, factory owners received the right to free the sessional peasants and hire free people and quitrent peasants instead.

In cities in parallel with the estate petty bourgeois and guild (masters, artisans, apprentices) the social group began to grow “working people“.

Portal for the student. Self-training