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:

Introduction

At the moment, Russia is undergoing a reform of local self-government. This is not the first reform in Russia in this area. One of the most important reforms of local self-government in Russia took place in 1775 and was called the provincial reform. The territorial division in accordance with this reform lasted almost unchanged until 1917.

After the Pugachev uprising, there was a need to carry out reforms, the existing system of government did not allow to subjugate and rule the country completely. At the same time, there was a need to strengthen the support of the autocracy, which Catherine II represented by the nobility.

This topic is relevant, since its result largely influenced the course of Russian history. In the course of the provincial reform, other aspects of life were also affected, such as the organization of courts and the police, the order of public charity - supervising the arrangement of schools, almshouses, shelters, etc.

The purpose of this work is to study the provincial reform of 1775, for this I set the following tasks:

Study of the prerequisites for the ongoing reform;

Study of provincial reform;

Study of Judicial Reform;

Make an analysis of the reforms carried out.

In the course of my work, I used the following sources: legislative acts adopted during the reforms, E. V. Anisimov, A. B. Kamensky Russia in the 18th - first half of the 19th century”, Vladimirsky-Budanov M.F. Overview of the history of Russian law, Isaev I.A. History of the state and law of Russia.

Provincial and judicial reform of 1775.

Before starting the presentation of the main topic, I would like to emphasize that the regional administration was for Catherine a convenient ground on which she could sow political ideas borrowed from the liberal teachings of European publicists. Moreover, special considerations prompted her to pay priority attention to the reorganization of the regional administration.

The Pugachev uprising, which horrified noble Russia, had important consequences for determining the further domestic policy of Catherine II. First of all, the empress was convinced of the deep conservatism of the lower strata of the population of the empire. Secondly, it became clear that, at all costs, only the nobility could be the true support of the throne. Finally, thirdly, the uprising clearly demonstrated the deep crisis of society and, consequently, the impossibility of further postponing reforms that should have been carried out gradually, step by step, through slow everyday work. The first fruit of the reform was one of the most significant legislative acts of Catherine's reign - "Institution for the administration of the provinces of the All-Russian Empire."

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

Also, it was the noble deputies of the codification commission of 1767 who insisted on the reorganization of the regional administration with particular force. These motives caused the “Institution for the Administration of the Province” published on November 7, 1775, to be published. The manifesto of November 7, 1775, which accompanied the promulgation of the "Institution", pointed out the following shortcomings of the existing regional administration: firstly, the provinces represented too extensive administrative districts; secondly, these districts were supplied with a too insufficient number of institutions with meager personnel; thirdly, various departments were mixed in this department: the same place was in charge of the administration itself, and finance, and the court, criminal and civil. The new provincial institutions were designed to eliminate these shortcomings. Instead of the previous 20 provinces that existed in 1766, according to "institutions about provinces", by 1795 fifty-one provinces had already appeared in Russia. Previously, the provinces were divided into provinces, and the provinces into counties; now the provinces were divided directly into counties. Previously, the regional division was carried out by accident, which is why it turned out that, for example, the Moscow province had 2,230,000 inhabitants, and the Arkhangelsk - only 438,000, and meanwhile the numerical staff of the administration was approximately the same in both provinces. The boundaries of the former provinces and regions were established partly according to geographical, partly according to historical grounds, or conditions; only the number of population was taken as the basis for the provincial division of Catherine.

With the new administrative division, it was adopted as a rule that in each province there were from 300 to 400 thousand inhabitants, and in the county - from 20 to 30 thousand. The new division was thus based on statistical data, during which in life, it was overlooked, as Platonov notes, that it is much more difficult to control the same 300-400 thousand souls if they are scattered over large spaces. With the greater fragmentation of the new administrative districts, more administrative centers were needed; therefore, many new cities arose, created quite artificially.

By changing the regional borders, the institution of the provinces also changed the structure of the regional administration. Until 1775, governors and voivodes with their own offices were the main governing body in the provinces, provinces and districts. The zemstvo element, introduced into the regional government by Peter I, was retained only in the city self-government and disappeared from the provincial government, which is why the local administration became bureaucratic. The court, separated under Peter from the administration, soon merged with it again. Thus, bureaucracy and confusion of departments became the hallmarks of local government. At the same time, the composition of the administration was small and the administration was weak. This weakness was clearly shown during the Moscow revolt of 1771, which took place under the influence of the plague. Moscow senators (there were two departments of the Senate in Moscow) and other authorities were confused at the first movement of the people. Even 500 soldiers could not muster against the rebellious crowd that killed Archbishop Ambrose.

The weakness of the administration during the well-known Pugachev rebellion of 1773-1774 was even more pronounced. On the occasion of the Turkish war, the government had few troops, and the administration could neither restrain the peasant unrest in time, nor take the necessary measures to protect not only society, but also themselves from all sorts of accidents and dangers. Under such conditions, Pugachev, under the name of Peter III, took possession of vast expanses from Orenburg to Kazan, and the struggle against him turned into a stubborn war. Only after a series of battles was Pugachev caught and executed in 1774. His gangs dispersed, but the excitement did not subside immediately, and Catherine worked out her institutions about the provinces, as already indicated above, under the fresh impression of an unusual pogrom. She sought to increase the strength of the administration, delimit departments and attract zemstvo elements to participate in management. In this, her aspirations resemble those of Peter the Great, but the forms of Catherine's administration diverged far from the forms of Peter's time, and their foundations were little, in essence, similar. See: E. V. Anisimov, A. B. Kamensky. "Russia in the 18th - the first half of the 19th century". Moscow: Miros, 1994, p. 231 Catherine's institutions, first of all, were much more complicated than those of Peter. In each provincial city were established:

1) The provincial government is the main provincial institution headed by the governor. It had an administrative character, was the auditor of the entire administration, represented the government authority in the province.

2) The criminal and civil chambers are the highest bodies of the court in the province.

3) Treasury Chamber - financial management body. All these institutions had a collegiate character (provincial government - only in form, because all power belonged to the governor) and bureaucratic composition and were in charge of all the estates of the province. Also in the provincial city were:

4) The Upper Zemstvo Court is a judicial place for noble litigation and for the trial of nobles.

5) The provincial magistrate is a judicial place for persons of the urban estate in claims and litigations against them.

6) Upper massacre - a judicial place for single-palaces and state peasants. These courts had a collegiate character, consisted of chairmen - crown judges and assessors - elected by the estate, whose affairs were dealt with by the institution. According to the range of affairs and composition, these institutions were, therefore, estates, but acted under the leadership of crown officials. Also, in the provincial city were:

7) Conscientious Court - for amicable settlement of litigations and for the trial of insane criminals and unintentional crimes and

8) Order of public charity - for the construction of schools, almshouses, orphanages, etc. In both of these places, crown officials presided, representatives of all estates met, and persons of all estates were in charge. So, not being estates, these institutions were not bureaucratic either.

Each county town had:

1) Nizhniyzemsky court - in charge of the county police and administration, consisting of a police officer (captain) and assessors; both he and others were elected from the nobility of the county. The ispravnik was considered the head of the county and was the executive body of the provincial administration.

2) County Court - for the nobility, subordinate to the Upper Zemstvo Court.

3) City magistrate - a judicial seat for citizens, subordinate to the provincial magistrate (the city police was entrusted to the crown official - the mayor).

4) Lower reprisal - a court for state peasants, subordinate to the upper reprisal. All these institutions in their composition were collegiate and class places (from the persons of the class whose affairs were in charge); only the chairman of the bottom violence was appointed from the government. In addition to the listed institutions, two more should be noted: for the care of widows and children of the nobles, the Noble Guardianship was established (at each Upper Zemstvo Court), and for the care of widows and orphans of the townspeople, an orphan's court (at each city magistrate). Both in that, and in other establishment members were estate representatives. The leader of the nobility presided over the Noble Guardianship (they began to exist since the time of the Catherine's commission), and the mayor presided over the orphan's court. Such was the system of local institutions of Catherine II. We see that instead of the rather simple forms of the past, there is now a whole network of institutions with numerous members spread out in each province, and this numerous administration is concentrated in smaller administrative districts. With an abundance of new institutions, we notice that they are trying to withstand the fashionable in the 18th century. the principle of separation of departments and authorities: the administration in them is separated from the court, the court - from financial management. Local societies, on the basis of the class principle, received wide participation in the affairs of local government: the nobility, the townspeople, and even people of the lower classes filled most of the new institutions with their representatives. The local administration took on the form of zemstvo self-government, which, however, acted in sensitive dependence and under the control of a few government officials and bureaucratic bodies. Catherine thought that she had achieved her goals: she strengthened the composition of the administration, correctly distributed the departments between the governing bodies, and gave the Zemstvo a wide participation in the new institutions. See: Isaev I.A. History of the state and law of Russia. M.: Lawyer, 1999.

Local government came out very systematic and liberal. It corresponded to some extent to the abstract theories of Catherine, because it reflected the liberal teachings of European publicists, and to the desires of the estates, because it had an undoubted connection with deputy desires. Self-government was discussed in the commission of 1767-1768. However, being very systematic in themselves, the local institutions of 1775 did not bring into the system the entire state administration. They did not affect the forms of central government, but had an indirect influence on it. The center of gravity of all management was transferred to the regions, and only the responsibility of leadership and general supervision remained in the center. Catherine was aware of this. But at first it did not touch anything in the central administration, and meanwhile changes had to take place in it, because Peter placed the main burden of administration on the St. Petersburg collegiums. Changes took place soon: in the absence of cases, the collegiums gradually began to be destroyed. The establishment of a harmonious system in local administration was followed by the fall of the former system in central administration. It began to demand reform and, having survived the final breakdown under Emperor Paul, received it already under Emperor Alexander I (when the ministries were established).

At the head of the province was the governor, appointed and dismissed by the monarch. In his activities, he relied on the provincial government, which included the provincial prosecutor and the bottom of the centurion. Financial and fiscal issues in the province were decided by the Treasury. Issues of health care, education were in charge of the order of public charity.

Supervision of legality in the province was carried out by the provincial prosecutor and two provincial lawyers. In the county, the same tasks were solved by the county lawyer. At the head of the county administration (and the number of counties also doubled under the reform) was the zemstvo police officer, elected by the county nobility, as well as the collegiate governing body - the lower zemstvo 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.

In cities, the position of mayor was established.

The leadership of several provinces was entrusted to the governor-general. 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 of appeal or reprisal chambers - the Senate (appellate instance).

The deputies proposed to make the trial public and open, but they advocated the creation of definitely 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).

As early as 1769, a draft law On Judicial Places was prepared, which regulated the beginnings of the judicial law of "enlightened absolutism".

It was supposed to establish several types of courts: spiritual (on matters of faith, law and internal church matters); criminal, civil, police (on matters of deanery); trading, (on merchant and brokerage affairs); military, court (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 the cities, in addition, guild courts were to be created.

All courts were included in a single system according to the 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. Zemstvo and city courts were supposed to be elected, and the trial public.

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

In the process of this reform, a strengthened judicial system was also formulated.

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

The court of appeal for the county courts was the Upper Zemstvo Court, which consisted of two departments: for 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. City magistrates, whose members were elected for three years, became the lower court for citizens.

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 were sued in the district lower reprisal, in which criminal and civil cases were considered by officials appointed by the authorities.

The court of appeal for the lower massacre was the upper massacre, cases in which were brought against a cash deposit within a week's time.

4. In the provinces, conscientious courts were established, consisting of class representatives (the chairman and two assessors): nobles - for noble cases, 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. Courts of appeal (in civil and criminal cases) became the courts of appeal and revision in the province.

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. The Senate remained the highest judicial body for the courts of the entire system. See: Vladimirsky-Budanov M.F. Overview of the history of Russian law. Rostov-on-Don: Phoenix, 1995.

The provincial reform of 1775 met the requirements of the times. The territorial division lasted virtually unchanged until 1917, significantly strengthening local government.

Shaken to its foundations by a gigantic social explosion, the noble empire of Catherine II almost immediately begins a kind of repair of its state machine.

First of all, its weakest link, the local authorities, was reorganized. Wise in the experience of the peasant war, the feudal lords subjected the local government to a radical restructuring. Catherine II herself played an active role in this. In a letter to Voltaire at the end of 1775, she reported: “I have just given my empire the Institution of the Provinces, which contains 215 printed pages. This is the fruit of five months of work, completed by me alone. Of course, Ekaterina did not develop this project alone. 19 projects were submitted, drawn up by prominent dignitaries and statesmen.

According to the project, all of Russia was now divided into 50 provinces instead of the previous 23. The main figure in the province was henceforth the governor, who was at the head of the "provincial government." The functions of the provincial government were quite extensive, but the main one was the wide announcement of the law of government orders, supervision of their implementation, and, finally, the right to prosecute those who violated the law. All local courts and police were subordinate to the provincial government. All expenses and incomes in the province, its industry, tax collection were in charge of the State Chamber. She also took over some of the functions of the central colleges. A completely new institution was the “Order of Public Charity”. Behind such a serene name, sounding like a charitable institution, rather prosaic functions were hidden - the protection of "order" in the interests of the domination of the nobles. The order of public charity was an assistant to the provincial police, although he was in charge of public education, and public health, and public charity, and restraint houses. Finally, in the province there was a provincial prosecutor and a whole system of judicial institutions with prosecutors attached to it. The highest of the courts were two chambers: the chamber of civil cases and the chamber of criminal cases, having the right to review the cases of provincial and district courts. The provincial courts themselves were class-based, i.e. nobles had their own court (it was called the “upper zemstvo court”), merchants and townspeople had their own (“provincial magistrate”). And, finally, there was a provincial court for “free” (state) peasants (“upper punishment”). Each of these courts had two departments with two chairmen (for criminal and civil cases). criminal cases from all courts were sent to the Chamber of Criminal Cases for approval. But only those cases in which the claim was worth at least 100 rubles fell into the chamber of civil cases, moreover, if the litigant also deposited 100 rubles as a pledge. To file an appeal with the Senate, the claim had to be at least 500 rubles, and the deposit - 200 rubles. This is where the class character of the court comes out, since practically only representatives of the propertied class could exercise the right of appeal.

Now let's go down a step, to the county. Each province now had an average of 10-15 uyezds. The main executive body here was the so-called “lower zemstvo court”. He, along with those who are at the head of it. The police captain had full power in the county. Monitoring the implementation of laws, the execution of orders of the provincial authorities, the execution of court decisions, the search for fugitive peasants - these are just the most important functions of this institution. The police captain now had enormous power, taking any measures to restore order in the county. The police captain and two or three assessors of the lower zemstvo court were chosen only by nobles and only from local landowners.

The courts in the proper sense of the word in the county were the “county court” (for the nobles) and the “lower punishment” (for state peasants). The nobles practically dominated not only in their court, but also in the “lower punishment”. now “noble guardianship.” For the election of candidates for numerous positions, county and provincial noble assemblies gathered, led by the county marshal of the nobility and the provincial marshal.

The city under the reform of 1775 became an independent administrative unit. The main institutions in the city were: the city magistrate, the conscientious court and the town hall in the suburbs. The competence of the city magistrate with the mayor at the head was similar to the competence of the county court, and the composition of the city magistrate was chosen by the local merchants and the bourgeoisie. The merchants and bourgeoisie now have their own guardianship in the manner of noble guardianship - the city orphan's court. Thus, at first glance, the city created its own full-fledged system of elective institutions. Poet only at first glance. If the nobles in the county elected the police captain and he had the fullness of all power, then at the head of the city was the mayor, who also owned enormous power, but. The mayor was appointed by the Senate from the nobility.

The “conscientious court” has become quite an unusual institution. He was subordinate to the Governor-General, and his functions included only reconciliation of the parties, control over arrests.

All these transformations, accelerated by the Peasants' War, were brewing even before it. But, meeting the interests of the landowners, by carrying out the provincial reform, Catherine II at the same time significantly strengthened state power in the localities. In 1789, city police councils were introduced, which received the touching, but false name of “deanery councils”. These councils in Moscow and St. Petersburg were headed by police chiefs, and in other cities - by mayors. The administration included two bailiffs (for criminal and civil cases) and two advisers (ratmans). Each city was divided into sections of 200-700 houses, and each section was divided into blocks of 50-100 houses. At the head of the sections was a private bailiff, and at the head of the quarters - a quarterly bailiff. Now every house, every citizen was under the vigilant supervision of the police.

By decentralizing administration, the tsarina at the same time retained powerful and effective control of the central government over the provinces. Over every 2-3 provinces, Catherine II appointed a vicegerent or governor-general with unlimited powers.

The system of local provincial institutions turned out to be so strong that it existed in its essence until the reform of 1861, and in some details until 1917.

Due to the fact that in the first half of the 18th century the likelihood of peasant riots increased sharply in Russia, Empress Catherine II took a number of measures to prevent them, one of which was the provincial reform of 1775. With this step, she managed to carry out a clearer division of the state into administrative units, the size of which depended on the number of taxpayers (taxable population). Among them, the provinces became the largest.

Previous reform

An administrative transformation of this kind was not something new for Russia, since back in 1708 it was preceded by the provincial reform carried out by Peter I. It was she who made radical changes in the life of society. Pursuing the same goal - to exercise the most complete control over everything that happens in the country, the sovereign established 8 provinces: Moscow, Kazan, Smolensk, Azov, Siberian, Arkhangelsk, Kiev, and also Ingermanland, which two years later was renamed St. Petersburg.

Each of these administrative divisions was headed by governors appointed by the king. The officials of such a high rank were those closest to him, in whose hands all military, civil and judicial power was concentrated. In addition, they also received the right to manage the finances of the provinces entrusted to them. Granting such extensive powers imposed on the governors and great responsibility.

The division of the territory of the state according to the statistical principle

The provincial reform initiated by Peter I was carried out in several stages and stretched out for a long time. So, after three years after it began, three more provinces were added to the above-mentioned provinces: Astrakhan, Nizhny Novgorod and Riga. In addition, in 1715, significant changes were made to the very procedure for organizing local self-government. In particular, the provinces were divided into smaller administrative units - provinces. They were formed according to the statistical principle, that is, based on the number of households.

Trying to further simplify the mechanism of government, in 1719 Peter I divided the provinces into counties, the total number of which in the country reached two and a half hundred. He put local governors in charge of them. At that time, this set of measures looked innovative and was not met with approval by all members of society, but no one dared to argue with the sovereign.

The main task of Catherine's reform

Returning to the provincial reform of 1775, we note that Catherine II had to carry it out on a much larger territory than Peter I once did, since over the past decades the borders of Russia were significantly pushed apart by the annexation of new lands to it. As a result, the administrative reforms she initiated were to affect 23 provinces, divided into 66 provinces, which in turn consisted of 180 counties. The essence of the provincial reform, begun in 1775, was to increase the efficiency of state administration by increasing the number of administrative centers. Looking ahead, we note that as a result of the reform, their number has almost doubled.

The measures taken were based on a document developed in the personal office of the Empress and called "Institutions for the management of the provinces of the All-Russian Empire." It provided for the further division of the state into separate administrative units, which were managed in accordance with the general vertical of power.

Estimated number of provincial and district residents

However, the formation of provinces and districts (the provinces were abolished by this reform) was supposed to be carried out without taking into account geographical, economic, national, or any other features. It was based only on a purely administrative principle, which assumed the maximum adaptation of the bureaucratic apparatus to the performance of police and fiscal functions.

When forming administrative units, only the number of people living in a given territory was taken into account. So, according to the accepted norms, each province should have had 400 thousand inhabitants, and about 30 thousand inhabitants in the county. Empress Elizabeth Petrovna (1760).

Governorate administration

In accordance with the norms laid down in the basis of the provincial reform of Catherine II, the largest administrative units were controlled by governors, who were appointed to and removed from it only directly by the emperor. Their closest assistants were members of the provincial government - the prosecutor and two centurions.

It was also planned to create state chambers - structures that were in charge of a wide range of issues related to finance and taxation. In addition to them, in each province there should have been orders of public charity, which were in charge of institutions of public education and health care. Control over the observance of the law throughout the territory under his jurisdiction was carried out by the prosecutor with two attorneys placed at his disposal.

The structure of the county government

The reform undertaken by Empress Catherine II also affected the administrative side of the life of the districts, for the management of which the local noble assemblies had to elect zemstvo police officers, to whom two assessors were attached. In addition, zemstvo courts were created in each county, which were collegiate governing bodies.

Their duties, in addition to the general supervision of order in the county, included ensuring control over the activities of the police. They also ordered the implementation of measures to implement the decisions taken by higher authorities. The provincial reform of 1775 also provided for the establishment of the post of mayor, who headed the administrative and police authorities of county towns.

Who are governor generals?

In addition to all the power structures listed above, the post of governor-general was introduced by decree of Catherine II. The officials who occupied it carried out the management of large regions, which included several provinces at once. In the absence of an emperor in the territory under their control, they received the widest powers, up to the introduction of a state of emergency there. In addition, in all necessary cases, they were given the right to directly contact him for additional instructions.

Conceived, but not implemented part of the provincial reform

As it is clear from a number of archival documents, the initial plan of Catherine II was somewhat different from what she managed to put into practice. So, back in 1769, members of the commission that developed its main provisions made attempts to remove the courts from the subordination of the provincial authorities. However, the difficulties associated with the need to create in this case a cumbersome multi-stage structure, ending with the Senate as an appellate instance, forced them to abandon their plans.

In addition, initially the essence of the provincial reform was the establishment of the so-called class courts, which were separately formed for the nobles and for all those who belonged to the lower social strata of society. But in the process of discussion, among the members of the working commission, there were supporters of a universal, open and public trial.

As a result, insurmountable contradictions between their demands prevented the withdrawal of courts from the control of local governments. The reason was that the nobles needed the intervention of the administration to protect their interests in court, and the members of the working commission understood this very well. Nevertheless, most of the provisions of the provincial reform developed by them were put into practice and served to strengthen centralized power and state stability in general. This was especially true in the judiciary.

The significance of the provincial reform for the Russian Themis

The disputes that arose between the supporters of democratic courts and the guardians of noble privileges ended in favor of the latter. On the basis of a clear division of citizens on social grounds, closed noble courts began to be created in the cities of the empire. The consideration of cases and the adoption of decisions were carried out by a judge and two assessors, who were elected by the local noble assembly for a period of three years.

In addition, the provincial reform of 1775 introduced the Upper Zemstvo Courts, which consisted of two departments - civil and criminal. They were entrusted with the functions of appellate instances. At the head of each of these departments was a chairman and his deputy - two people appointed personally by the emperor. They were given the right to conduct audits in order to control the activities of provincial and district courts.

In the cities of the Russian Empire, magistrates were established, which were the lowest judicial instances. Their composition, which included two chairmen and two assessors, was also elected for a term of three years. All appeals on their decisions were subject to consideration in the provincial magistrates.

As for the peasants, they were tried in the so-called county reprisals, which consisted of officials appointed by local authorities. Their decisions, both in civil and criminal cases, if necessary, were appealed to the upper (provincial) reprisals. The highest judicial body in Russia then and in subsequent years was the Senate.

The results of the reform of 1775

The main goal of the provincial reform, which, according to researchers, was to strengthen the centralized state power through the creation of more efficient local governments, as well as the separation of judicial and executive authorities, was achieved. Thanks to it, all classes of citizens of the Russian Empire, with the exception of serfs, were able to take a more active part in local government.

In addition, thanks to the reform carried out by Catherine II, it was possible to significantly reduce the apparatus of the highest state power, abolishing almost all colleges created back in the time of Peter I. An exception was made for only three of them, the most important - Military, Admiralty and Foreign. The functions of all the rest were transferred to local governments.

Conclusion

It is difficult to overestimate the importance of Catherine's provincial reform. The year of its implementation was a turning point in the centralization of Russian state power. According to the researchers, by dividing the country's territory into separate administrative units, it greatly expanded the ability to manage its many regions. An important role was played in those years by the reorganization of the judicial system, as well as the creation of a number of bodies designed to carry out police and, if necessary, punitive functions.

It was not for nothing that Catherine 2 declared herself the ideological successor of Peter the Great - she went in a similar vein. In particular, the empress sought to arrange life throughout the state according to a single model and control it as much as possible. The provincial reform of 1775 served the same purpose.

Transformation Goals

The reform was designed to unify the management of large administrative units within the country, and nothing more. National, religious, geographical, military and other conditions were not taken into account. On this basis, nationalists from the outlying districts often accuse that they used the provincial reform to suppress the national movement. In a way, they are right - the "cutting" of the territories of the provinces ran counter to the borders of national regions. Also in the year of the start of the reform in Ukraine, the Zaporizhzhya freemen was liquidated (contrary to stereotypes, without blood), and the provincial system was also extended to the Zaporizhzhya territories along with the newly conquered lands of the Black Sea region in 1782.

But the reform was certainly not intended only to fight national separatism. At that time, he was almost safe for the country. But it was not easy to lead a state of such size and in the conditions of that time.

The essence of the reform

The provincial system created a strict vertical of power under the complete control of the monarch. Peter 1 had previously tried to create something similar, but his provinces were too large. Ekaterininsky provinces (50 in number) each had 300-400 thousand inhabitants and, accordingly, differed in area. Several provinces, if necessary, could be combined into a vicegerency or governor-general. But this has already been done with an eye to military or political needs.

The province was headed by a governor appointed by the tsar. The monarch appointed both governor-generals and governors. They only reported to him. Under the governor, there was a board consisting of the vice-governor (actually the treasurer), two advisers and a prosecutor. Such a composition of the provincial leadership contributed to the implementation of another reform - the judicial one (the prosecutor was actually in charge of the judicial system in the province).

Catherine could not deprive the local nobility of a role in the administration of the provinces. It led at a lower level - the county. The population of the county usually amounted to about 30 thousand people (that is, there were 10-15 counties in the province). The counties were led by police captains and county assessors, who were elected by local nobles.

Cities were to be led by mayors appointed "from above" and an elected magistrate. As a result, the provincial governments replaced a number of boards - they were abolished.

The level of the province turned into an appellate court when considering court cases (the first instance acted at the level of cities and counties), but at the same time the court was class-based, separately for nobles, burghers and peasants.

results

The system of provinces withstood the test of time - with minor changes, it operated until 1917. It contributed to the creation of a simple vertical of power at the level of large and medium-sized administrative units (monarch - governor - police officer), unification of the system of administration and legal proceedings throughout the country, and better control of remote areas. A number of powers were transferred from the central authorities to the provincial level (in particular, the maintenance of roads, law enforcement, the maintenance of schools, hospitals, shelters).