so as to prove that the discontent is entirely due to them. Plehve
asserts that he has forty thousand political indictments, eighty per
cent. of the indicted being Jews. That is made up to suit themselves,
and has nothing to do with turbulence. On the other hand, I dare say,
that quite often just for this statistical reason, and because the Jews
are punished quite differently from the sons of distinguished families,
the Jews are urged by their congeners not to expose themselves; but
they, too, are of course infected by the general fanaticism of
self-sacrifice."
"But from what do the special student disturbances about which we hear
so much proceed? Are they not caused by troubles in the universities?"
"Only in the very rarest cases. It is occurrences of general politics
which find a particularly lively echo among the students; the reforms
which are demanded for the university by us, the professors, are even
repudiated by the students, because they do not wish to let the causes
of their discontent be removed."
"What is the nature of the reforms in question?"
"General Wannowski, former minister of education, was perhaps a man of
limited capacity, who considered the university a barracks, the
professors colonels and other officers, the students privates, and
explained that the only thing lacking was non-commissioned officers to
keep their respective squads in order. Still he showed us the
consideration of asking us eighteen questions which were to be answered
by the faculties. Look here"--the professor pointed to a heavy bundle of
printed matter--"here you have the results of our inquest."
"And what is the substance of your wishes, to put it into a very few
words?"
"One word is sufficient, 'Autonomy.' We want independence in teaching,
'Lehrfreiheit' as it is in Germany, independent regulation of our own
affairs, and liberation from the direction of another department which
has neither interest in us nor understanding of us. This demand was
unanimously expressed by all the universities; in Moscow only two
professors in the whole faculty declared themselves for the prevalent
system."
"Was anything accomplished by this inquest?"
"To a slight extent. We obtained a university court, constituted of
professors, and the permission to form scientific societies among the
students."
"That is not so bad. And you say that the students are not in sympathy
with that?"
"No, they are afraid that discontent may be lessened by these
concessions, and they wish to be discontented until they have
accomplished everything."
"What do you mean by 'everything'?"
"A constitution and freedom of the press. They do not even use the right
to form scientific societies. _At present there is no studying done at
our universities_; politics have swallowed up everything, and the
radical element has seized the leadership completely. They hope in a few
months, by means of demonstrations, and Heaven knows what fateful
resources, to attain a constitution, and after that there will always be
time enough for study. At present, study, too, would be treason against
the cause of freedom. The universities are only political camps
awaiting the call to arms and nothing more."
"But in this respect, at least, they must be glad of their independent
university courts--that is, that at any rate they punish their youthful
misdeeds more leniently than the police."
"No. In the first place, it is only disciplinary matters over which our
court has jurisdiction; and then, in the second place, you forget that
the students do not at all want to be mildly treated, but to be
sacrificed."
"Of course. It is hard to reckon with motives that one scarcely
understands. But one thing is still unintelligible to me. It cannot
exactly be said that Russia is a radical country in the sense that the
whole upper stratum is radical. How is it that the student body, which
comes principally from this upper stratum, is so laden with
revolutionary tendencies?"
"I might answer you in a French phrase, although it is not particularly
flattering to us, 'Le Russe est liberal jusqu'à trente ans, et
après--canaille.'[8] The Russian is absolutely _not_ conservative, not
even the official. He can mock conservatism while seeking office, but in
his own house he remains a free-thinker, and youth, which has not yet
learned to cringe and hedge, blushes at the two-facedness of its
parentage, and continually reveals the true attitude of the house. Then,
with the exception of the high nobility, our whole landowner class is
more than liberal. Moreover, from two to three hundred conservative
students are to be found at each of the great universities, and they
have formed a secret association for the protection of the _sacred
régime_--and it is characteristic that the _Novoye Vremya_ was allowed
to print the call to form this secret society, although here in Russia
all secret societies are illegal."
"And are not these conservative students dangerous to their fellows?"
"Up to the present they have confined themselves to patriotic
demonstrations. They might become dangerous if they once decided to go
to lectures--not even then to their fellow-students, but to the
professors, who have greater doctrinal freedom, and who also make use of
the right to express their opinions, of course within the limits of
their special subjects. [Shortly after this interview a professor in
Kharkov who had expressed sympathy for the Japanese was actually
informed against by the conservative students and disciplined by the
authorities, a thing which led to great student demonstrations.]
Moreover, there are special spies which keep watch over the professors
and students, but luckily they are too illiterate to understand the
import of what is said, and therefore can do little damage."
"Are the professors sufficiently in sympathy with each other for the
formation of a university esprit de corps?"
"Most certainly. The common suffering, the fact that they are forbidden
to take open part in politics draw them together. Where in other places
rivalries and differences of opinion occasion dissensions, here there is
to be found only one solid whole--oppression is the firm cement. And
only in this way is it possible to make some resistance to the
absolutism of the police. In _open_ resistance we are quite weak, yes,
even defenceless, against the brutality of the régime, but in _passive_
resistance we are almost unconquerable because of our close contact with
each other."
"Ah! And so here there is brought to my attention one of those
subterranean sources of public opinion in Russia, which I have so long
sought."
"Of course. The universities form at least one of the main channels."
"And you consider the next generation to be thoroughly impregnated with
ideas of independence?"
"Thoroughly."
To the question with which I always parted from my authorities--that is,
what he believed the immediate future contained for Russia--this
professor, whose department I am not at liberty to indicate, but of whom
I can say that he is particularly well informed, gave the following
answer:
"We are exhausted. The transition to the financing of railroads, tariff
legislation, the tightening of screws of taxation bring in money for a
while, but no real power. We are on the brink of a crisis. I believe
that the war will greatly accelerate and force us to discount our
coupons.[9] Then, in my opinion, it cannot be long before a sort of
national assembly is called. This is my belief and my hope. Conditions
of excitement like the present ones at our universities cannot be long
endured under any circumstances. In one way or another a change must
take place, and we must hold fast to the hope of better things."
FOOTNOTES:
[8] The Russian is liberal until his thirtieth year--and then he joins
the rabble.
[9] Den Coupon zu kürzen.
XXIV
BEFORE THE CATASTROPHE[10]
"If you wish to have a striking evidence of the worth of our government,
you need notice only one thing," said an entirely unprejudiced Russian
to me one day. "We have as many questions as we have classes of
population. We have a Finnish question, a Polish, a Jewish, a Ruthenian,
and a Caucasian question. We have, besides, a peasant question, a labor
question, and a sectarian question, and, moreover, a student question
also. Wherever you cut into the conglomerate of the Russian population,
lengthwise or crosswise, everywhere you strike conflicts, combustibles,
and tension. Not a single one of the problems which may exist in
organized states in general is solved, but every one has been made
burning and dangerous through unskilful, brutal, and even malicious
handling."
The man who spoke in this way was not a Liberal, but a Conservative
aristocrat in the state service. I had reserved him for the end in my
journey of research. After I had had conversations with high officials
in the departments of education and of finance, with men like Prince
Ukhtomski, with bankers and with lawyers, and had heard always the same
story of the instability of things and the worthlessness of the régime,
I turned to the friends who by their influence had smoothed the way for
me everywhere, and said to them: "This cannot go on. I did not come to
Russia merely to be shot, as it were, out of a pneumatic tube through a
collection of Liberal and Radical malcontents. I do not wish to hear
merely the opposition in Russia. You must gain access for me to some
prominent Conservative also, one who stands on the basis of the present
system, and who honestly and in good faith defends it. It need not be
Suvorin or any other man of questionable honor, for I myself can apply
Stahl's theories to Russian conditions. It must be a sincere, reputable,
and sensible man with whom I can discuss the most widely different
questions with or without an interpreter; either is the same to me."
My request was readily granted. A scholar admired almost to the point of
worship, in whose house I had been entertained, gave me a letter to the
Conservative aristocrat whose words I have quoted at the beginning of
this paper. This letter I forwarded to the honorable gentleman in
question, asking for an interview, and by return mail I received a reply
stating that he would expect me that same afternoon.
I must confess that I anticipated this interview with some qualms. It
was towards the end of my visit. The results hitherto obtained had the
disadvantage of a certain monotony of sombreness, with, however, the
advantage also that each succeeding interview only strengthened the
impression gained from previous ones. Thus by degrees I had formed a
very sharply defined image of Russian conditions--such an image as is
pictured in the mind of the thinking Russian. Was this clear and
distinct image now to be dispelled by the lye of this Conservative
critic, and was I to lose the chief result of my journey, a confidence
in the trustworthiness of the data hitherto accumulated?
I met the gentleman at his house at the appointed time, and learned at
once that I had been especially commended to him. I therefore entered
without hesitation upon the matter in which I was interested.
"I do not wish," I began, "to go through Russia in blinders. If your
excellency, as a Conservative, will have the goodness to refute what I
have heard hitherto, and will give me more accurate information, I shall
be under great obligation."
"What have you heard?" asked the count.
"That Russia is starving, while the papers report a surplus in the
treasury."
"That, unfortunately, is true."
"That your thinking people are in despair."
"Also true."
"That a revival of the Reign of Terror is to be feared."
"Equally true."
"That all Russia hopes the war will be lost, because only in that way
can the present state of things be brought to an end."
"True again."
"That the present régime passes all bounds of depravity, and can be
compared only with the Prætorian rule in the period of the decline of
Rome."
"That understates the truth."
My face must have taken on a very strange expression during this brisk
play of question and answer, for the count now took the initiative, and
said:
"You are, I can see, surprised that I, as a Conservative and a state
official, should answer in this way; but I hope you do not consider
'conservative' and 'infamous' synonymous terms. If you do not, you will
not expect me to approve the régime of Plehve. That is not a
Conservative régime. It is the régime of hell founded by a devil at the
head of the most important department." (Here came the speech with which
this paper began.) The count then proceeded: "Do not suppose that Russia
is of necessity smitten with such serious problems. These questions are
nowhere simpler than with us. We have no national problems like those of
Prussia, for instance, or of Austria-Hungary, which are complicated by
the fact that majorities and minorities are mixed together almost beyond
separation. We have even in Poland almost no national aspirations
regarding which we could not come to a peaceable understanding. Our
nationalities live almost entirely distinct, in compact bodies side by
side; even the Finns are politically separate. It would be an easy thing
to make them all contented under just maintenance of the supremacy of
the Czar. But the priestlike intolerance of Pobydonostzev has spread the
idea in the world that all diversities of religion and speech must be
ironed out with a hot flat-iron, even at the risk of singeing heads.
Since then it is considered patriotic to repress men and convictions.
For this business unclean creatures are to be found who make careers for
themselves in this way; and their prototype is the tenfold renegade
Plehve."
"Yet I cannot conceal my astonishment, your excellency, that you, as a
Conservative, have this opinion of the system of Pobydonostzev."
"Why is that so illogical? Conservative thought is, above all, that of
organic development. All violence is revolutionary in its essence,
whether it serves reactionary or republican tendencies. The system of
Pobydonostzev is revolutionary and reactionary. In his fashion Plehve,
however, is simply a monstrous bill of extortion against the Czar as
well as against the shackled nation."
"Your excellency of course refers to the idea that Plehve intimidates
the Czar by threats of revolution?"
"That is not an idea simply; it is a fact, of which we have very
definite information. But what not every one knows is the fact that we
have no one but Plehve to thank for this war, which may be a
catastrophe. He had a finger in all the manoeuvres of delay which
provoked the Japanese to war, because he believed that he could no
longer preserve himself in any other way than by diverting public
attention from conditions in the interior, and by ridding himself of
those who were dissatisfied with him into the bargain."
"How the latter?"
"You do not know? It is very simple. The first men who were sent to Asia
were the Poles, the Jews, and the Armenians. Among our troops the Poles
were five times as largely represented, and the Jews even more so, than
they should have been according to their census number. And you must
search to discover a Christian among the reserve surgeons. Why is this
the case? To get rid of the most important elements of the malcontents
for years, perhaps forever. Of course, the Poles, the Jews, and the
Ruthenians have the most cause for discontent. Meanwhile there is peace
at home."
"Not to a remarkable extent, I observe."
"Wait. The students, who are so incautious in airing their ideas, will
come to know the East."
"Your excellency, no Radical has spoken like this."
"I can well understand that. The honorable Radicals have much less
cause to be dissatisfied with this rule of banditti, for it sends the
water to their mills. But a Conservative like myself sees with horror
that all the foundations of the Conservative order of things are
undermined, and that we are approaching exactly the same convulsions
that France experienced after the spontaneous downfall of her absolute
monarchy."
"In what respect, then, does your excellency distinguish yourself as a
Conservative from the so-called Liberals? Certainly not in criticism?"
"I will explain. The Liberals are Girondists, with their ideas adopted
from Cahier and Rousseau. Minister Turgot was a Conservative, who wished
to save the monarchy by trying to make an end of the loose management of
favorites. We Conservatives do not believe in a constitution or a
parliament as the only means of salvation. We Russians are anything but
ripe for that. It is a question if any people of the Continent,
untrained in English self-government, are ripe for it. We look to the
Czar for salvation, and to the Czar alone."
"Prince Ukhtomski says much the same thing. He does not speak of Liberal
or Conservative, but only of an intelligent party in Russia, and he
believes that an able minister could save the whole situation."
"I do not believe that for an instant. For, under the present
circumstances, an able and honest minister cannot remain at court. There
is only one salvation--a czar who is so educated for his task of ruling
that he is not the plaything of a circle of courtiers, like our present
good Emperor."
"I have heard a saying of Pobydonostzev, 'Autocracy is good, but it
involves an autocrat.'"
"Certainly; even if it were not Pobydonostzev's opinion. For brutality
alone certainly will not do. We must have knowledge of the subject and
strength of will."
"Then the future must look very black to your excellency, if you await
salvation from a new and better-trained czar. At present there is not
even a prospect of a successor to the throne."
"It looks black enough. I have no hope at all. For what is hope to
others is to me new ground for sorrow. We shall be defeated in Asia. We
shall have a financial crash--_i. e._, our long-existent bankruptcy can
no longer be veiled by juggling with the budget; and then we shall have
a repetition of the old game of revolutions and constitutions. Some
Western ideas on constitution-making will be imported and will not work.
There will come a reaction, and the hand of every man will be against
every other...."
"Then your excellency is opposed to the freedom of the press?"
"God forbid! A Conservative régime is far from being a police régime. We
must have a public opinion and a respectable press, and a press without
freedom cannot be respectable. A press which is under strict laws but
not under police tyranny, and an honorable government, can both be
brought about more easily under an absolute monarchy than under
parliamentary rule; but there will be no question of all this."
"I find hardly any essential difference between the ideas your
excellency represents and those I have been hearing for months in
Russia."
"You cannot wonder at that. If you should ask me whether the snow
out-of-doors is white or green, I also, as a Conservative, can only
answer that it is white. We are in a bad way; our peasantry is starving,
our thinking class is in despair, our finances are ravaged. Yet I
believe that far more evil days are before us, and I thank God that I am
an old man who has seen the worst."
So ended my interview with the Conservative, whom I had sought out for
the correction of the Radical views I had heard. In the evening I had to
make a report to my friends, who had waited it in suspense. My
information created an immense sensation. Something entirely different
from the interview had been expected, and there was astonishment at
hearing views as bitter as any one present could have formulated. Had he
permitted me to publish the conversation with his name?
"The conversation, but not his name," I answered.
A general "Aha!" went up from all present.
"That is the way with our chinovniks," remarked some one; "in a
tête-à-tête they are all Liberal, and as soon as they are on the retired
list they are all Radical."
"I beg pardon. Count X---- spoke with decision against a constitution,
therefore he is not a Liberal."
"We must beg of you," came in an almost unanimous chorus, "for Heaven's
sake, not to adopt this view and represent it abroad. It would be the
greatest misfortune that could happen to us if the outer world should
believe that we really are not ripe for a constitution. We do not need
an English or a Belgian constitution, to be sure, but a free parliament
and a free press we do need. Otherwise there is no reliance to be placed
upon any reform, and the farther from the centre the more Asiatic will
be the rule of the satraps."
"My duty is to report and not to judge," said I, dryly. "I owe it to my
authority to reproduce his views as he gave them to me. The only thing
that I can do is to add your criticism to my report."
They were satisfied with this offer; and in accordance therewith I have
reproduced the interview.
FOOTNOTE:
[10] An interview with a Russian Conservative.
XXV
SECTARIANS AND SOCIALISTS
I was taken one day to see a young Russian nobleman who was making a
special study of the nature of sects. We drove to the outermost skirts
of Moscow and stopped before a small palace. My companion, another young
boyar, spoke to the servants, and after a few minutes we were conducted
up a broad marble staircase to the first floor, where a suite of rooms
furnished in extremely modern style opened out before us. I remarked to
my companion that, after all, there really are no boundaries between
countries, for this little palace with its very modern interior might
just as well have been in Paris or London as here in Moscow. Instead of
answering, the boyar motioned towards the ikon which hung in a corner.
Modern furnishings, a bookcase filled with the most modern philosophical
literature, and above it the orthodox ikon--we were in Moscow, after
all.
The master of the house came in and embraced and kissed his friend. I
was introduced, and we shook hands. Cigarettes were lighted, and without
further formalities the young host took some manuscripts from a shelf
and began to give me a private reading. My companion helped out when the
reader's vocabulary failed him. It is thus that I am in a position to
give from my notes the following excerpts from a work which cannot be
printed in Russia, because it deals with the forbidden subject of the
character of sects in a fashion not entirely acceptable to the censor.
The significance of sects in the inner structure of Russian life is best
shown by some figures which give approximately their membership. In the
year 1860 about ten million Raskolniks (non-conformists) were counted;
in 1878, fourteen million; in 1897, twenty million; and to-day they
number thirty million. These non-conformists not only do not belong to
the orthodox church, but stand in hostility to the state, which
identifies itself with the orthodox church. The sects are constantly
increasing in number, and there is no doubt whatever that they answer
much better to the religious needs of the Russian people than the state
church, just as they already comprise what is morally the best part of
the nation.