When Russia recently abolished the sale of liquor, first in the shops
run as a Government monopoly, and, after a brief experience of the
beneficent results, in the restaurants and clubs as well, an astonished
and admiring world recognized the measure as one of the greatest events
in the moral history of a nation. It takes rank with the reforms of
Peter the Great. It almost casts into the shade the emancipation of the
serfs.
There has always existed in Russia a strong party which severely
disapproved of Peter precisely because he forced "Western" ideas upon
them. Their idea has always been that Russia would have developed a far
higher degree of genuine culture and far more precious spiritual
qualities had she been left to the promptings of her own genius and its
"healthy, natural" development. And there are, indubitably, persons
scattered through the vast Russian Empire who entertain parallel
opinions with regard to the total prohibition of liquor just effected,
and with regard to the projected change in the calendar now assumed to
be imminent. I trust that I shall not increase their numbers to
dangerous proportions if I call attention to the fact that these reforms
have also, like Peter the Great's ideas, been imported from the
West--from the Far West, the United States. I am sure my
fellow-countrymen will be gratified to learn the truth, and I cheerfully
accept the risk, and assume that Russia will, in all probability, remain
ignorant of my interference!
It is true that we do not have actual, effective prohibition anywhere
here in America, and that we do not seem to be within measurable
distance of such an achievement; that Russia has distanced us again in
this, just as she distanced us by emancipating her serfs, without a
war, before we emancipated our slaves, with the aid of a war. But we
have supplied the scriptural mustard seed in the case of prohibition in
Russia, and have either furnished the seed for the change in the
calendar, or, at any rate, have provided elements that have hastened its
growth to a very remarkable degree.
Mustard seed No. 1 was carried over from the United States in the Autumn
of 1887 and sown on the good ground of the late Count Tolstoy, and other
noble men, whence--as results show--it spread abroad with a swiftness
suggestive rather of the proverbial weed than of the fair flower its
blossoming has shown it to be.
In the Autumn of 1886 Dr. Peter Semyonovitch Alexyeeff of Moscow,
accompanied by his wife, sailed for Canada and the United States for the
purpose of inspecting the hospitals, prisons, and elementary schools;
and they came for the Winter because some parts of Canada during that
season possess a climate similar to that of Central Russia, while in
other parts the climates are identical. In fact, Canada is the only
country in the world where the climatic conditions are at all analogous.
The construction of new hospitals, the adaptation of already existing
buildings for hospital use, the internal arrangement, and the perfection
of their internal machinery had long been matters of deep interest to
Dr. Alexyeeff.
Germany and France, with climates so different from that of Russia,
could not furnish him with the information available in North America,
where, in his opinion, the habits and conditions of existence--such
important factors in matters connected with hospitals and invalids--also
differ less from those of Russia than do the general surroundings in the
countries of the Continent. After visiting the principal cities of
Canada and the United States from Quebec to Vancouver, and from Boston
to Washington, (some of them more than once,) Dr. Alexyeeff arrived at
the conclusion that the hospitals of the United States were better built
and much better administered than those of London, Paris, Berlin, and
Vienna.
Naturally, no one could spend nine months in investigating hospitals and
prisons in this country without coming in contact with the liquor
problem. Moreover, Dr. Alexyeeff was a wideawake man, who took an
interest not only in all matters connected with his profession, but in
very many outside of it. He was, also, a man of very lofty character.
His wife once wrote me concerning him somewhat as follows: "He walks,
habitually, on such moral heights, in such a rarefied spiritual
atmosphere, that I, the daughter of an English clergyman, reared
accordingly, and myself (as you know) deeply in sympathy with it, find
difficulty in following him." Obviously, he was precisely the man to
appreciate the temperance movement, and to carry it to its logical
conclusion. In the preface to a volume, "About America," which he
published in Moscow in 1888, he writes:
Neither the wonders of wild nature in the Rocky Mountains nor
the menacing might and grandeur of Niagara produce such an
impression on a Russian as the success of the fight with
drunkenness--the temperance movement--and the successful
development, in all classes of society, of morality and the
strict application of practical morals.
He did not confine himself to this brief, general statement. He wrote in
praise of temperance, of prohibition, for learned Russian societies.
Then he wrote a book entitled "Concerning Drunkenness." The Censor's
permit to publish is dated March 29, (April 10,) 1887. It was published
by the management of the magazine, Russkaya Mysl, (Russian Thought,)
which may indicate that it had first appeared in that monthly as a
series of articles, though I have not been able to verify the fact. The
book may have been published promptly, or at least the article from the
medical magazine may have been published in the cheap form (costing two
or three cents) used by the semi-commercial, semi-philanthropic firm
"Posrednik," which may be rendered "Middleman" or "Mediator," designed
for the dissemination of good and useful reading among the masses.
At any rate, "Concerning Drunkenness" appeared at the price of one ruble
(about fifty cents) in 1891, prefaced by a dissertation by Count
Tolstoy, "Why Do People Stupefy Themselves?" specially written for this
occasion, as Dr. Alexyeeff told me. (It has been translated under the
title of "Alcohol and Tobacco," London, and published without any
indication that Dr. Alexyeeff inspired it.)
In 1896 a second edition, revised and enlarged, was published, also in
Moscow; and to this the author added a list of helpful publications and
a summary bibliography, which included books issued in various foreign
countries, ranging in number from 705 for Great Britain and Colonies,
142 for the United States, 247 for Germany, 124 for ten other countries
combined, (up to 1885 in all these cases,) to ten for Russia. Of these
ten, four are in Latin, four in German, one is in Swedish and one in
Russian--the latter, evidently, an article republished from The Medical
News. On the whole, a list practically non-existent, so far as Russia
was concerned!
Dr. Alexyeeff had discovered a field of endeavor as virgin as the
unplowed steppe. Only scientists desperately hard up for an unusual
topic for a strictly academic discussion and recklessly willing to risk
incurring universal unpopularity would have dreamed of unearthing those
volumes. He promptly aroused Count Tolstoy's interest in the subject of
temperance, which in this case signified prohibition, since the Count in
his preface to Dr. Alexyeeff's book (dated July 10-22, 1890,) treated
liquor on the same basis as tobacco, which he had totally abjured at
least two years previously. With Tolstoy, to become convinced that a
reform was desirable was, as all the world knows, to become an ardent
propagandist of that reform. Thanks to the efforts of Dr. Alexyeeff,
seconded by those of Tolstoy, temperance began to attract attention in
Russia, temperance societies were formed, and have been steadily
increasing ever since in numbers and activity.
Eventually Mr. Tchelisheff arrived on the scene with his splendid vital
force and practical solutions of the financial and other problems (or
suggestions for them) that arise from prohibition, (especially when a
Government monopoly and revenue are concerned,) which he most
strenuously advocated when Mayor of Samara, as representative in the
Duma--everywhere, in fact, where he could obtain a hearing, willing or
unwilling, up to the Emperor Nicholas himself. And the Emperor showed
that he was equal to the magnificent opportunity, and joined hands with
the former peasant in aiding his country.
In an interview published by THE TIMES a while ago Mr. Tchelisheff
mentions that his attention was first drawn to the subject of the evils
of drunkenness by a book which he saw a muzhik reading. Judging from the
point at which he inserts that mention into his outline sketch of his
career (previous to the great famine which he--erroneously--assigns to
the "end of the '80s," but which came in 1891) his interest was aroused
precisely at the time when Dr. Alexyeeff's first utterances may be
assumed to have seen the light of print. At any rate, it is an admitted
fact that Dr. Alexyeeff carried to Russia and to Tolstoy from the United
States the idea and inspiration which has borne such wonderful fruit in
the abolition of the liquor traffic "forever," as the Imperial ukase
runs.
Mr. Tchelisheff is a noteworthy figure in history accordingly, but Dr.
Alexyeeff should not be forgotten. When I made his acquaintance at Count
Tolstoy's, in Moscow, he had just requested (and obtained) a detail of
service in Tchita, Trans-Baikal Province, Siberia, as physician to the
political exiles there, thinking the region would repay study from many
points of view, in his leisure hours. The preface to the first edition
of his book "Concerning Drunkenness" is dated "July, 1899, Tchita," and
from Tchita I received my copy from him. In that preface he states the
scope of his book in a way which confirms my conviction that Mr.
Tchelisheff was first stirred to interest, and in the end aroused to
action, by the United States, via Dr. Alexyeeff. He writes:
The battle which in all ages has been waged against
drunkenness has been confined hitherto almost exclusively to
the realms of medicine and ethics; the social part of the
question is only just beginning to be worked out, and has
hardly as yet won the rights of citizenship, and down to our
own day there have been no serious legal measures adopted for
the battle with drunkenness.
Therefore, he omits the legal aspects of the matter in his book and
confines himself to an attempt at popularizing the information scattered
in divers individual books, "borrowing everything which can lead to the
ultimate goal--the extermination of the evil caused by the use of
spirituous drinks." He continues:
Public opinion has nowhere as yet, even in the lands where
considerable success has attended the war on drunkenness,
ripened sufficiently a desire to give, even incompletely, a
summary of the information about that battle, and make my
fellow-countrymen acquainted with a matter still little known
in Russia, so I am prompted to write what follows.
The second edition of this book, with the surprising list of Russian
treatises on drunkenness to which I have already alluded, is dated
"June, 1895, Riga," where he lived after his return from Siberia, as an
official of the Government medical service, until his death in August,
1913. During the stay in Tchita of the Alexyeeffs, the present Emperor
(then the heir,) passed through it, on his way home (from the trip to
India and Japan which came so near terminating fatally in the latter
country) after having officially opened work upon the construction of
the Trans-Siberian Railway, on the shores of the Pacific Ocean. A formal
reception and ceremonies were organized in Tchita; and I allude to the
matter because of a curious detail mentioned in a letter to me by Mrs.
Alexyeeff. Foreigners have very queer ideas, she said, as to the
position and treatment of the political exiles in Siberia; some of the
Tchita exiles served as heads of the committees for welcoming the heir,
and he shook hands with them and treated them exactly as he treated the
Governor General of the Province.
Whether it was his admiration for the American temperance movement which
influenced Dr. Alexyeeff's views on everything American, I cannot say.
But, assuredly, not many foreign visitors have pronounced upon our
country such a panegyric as is contained in the preface to his "Across
America." He writes:
Conscientious fulfillment of every duty, industry, energy, and
moral purity are the typical qualities of the genuine
American. It is difficult to form any idea of the wide
development of philanthropy, the significance of religion, and
the practical application to life of ethical principles, the
application of moral obligations in business, the upright,
God-fearing life of the Americans, unless one has lived among
them. They have neither prostitution, foundling hospitals, nor
hospitals for venereal diseases. A European is not accustomed
to see empty prisons and hospitals in densely settled
localities--to come upon cities where there is nothing for the
police, the Judges, and the doctors to do he finds startling.
They have attained the height where priests, pastors,
preachers, and teachers are rarely obliged to contend with
indifference....
After a trip to America it would be difficult to return an
atheist--you are more likely to come back in a religious frame
of mind.... Idleness and luxury are not among the
distinguishing characteristics of the descendants of the
Puritans.... In the light, transparent atmosphere of the
States, simplicity, the cheerful, alert spirit infects the
foreigner, makes him a more frank, trustful, optimistic
warrior for the truth, and causes him to forget what it means
to be downcast in spirit, or what spleen and hypochondria are.
Until he died, in Siberia, in Russia, everywhere, Dr. Alexyeeff worked
for temperance. He was enthusiastic about it when I saw him and his wife
in England, in 1907.
Mr. Tchelisheff having been aroused to interest, theoretically, by
America, via Dr. Alexyeeff, as is fairly proven, it was only natural
that he should proceed to make the personal observations on the
practical, social side of drunkenness which he mentions in his Times
interview. He noticed, during the great famine of 1891, that it was the
drunkards who had squandered their grain and pawned their possessions
to the keepers of the dramshops who robbed other men's granaries and
houses, burned, rioted, and murdered; while the men who did not drink
had plenty of food and grain to hold out. We are informed from Russia
that even during its still brief reign prohibition has resulted in
remarkable improvement in health, living conditions, and bank accounts.
Mr. Tchelisheff is, as I have said, a noteworthy figure in history. He
would be a remarkable figure in any land; but for those who are not
acquainted with Russia, the rise of a man born a peasant, educated
solely by his own efforts on stray newspapers and books which fell in
his way in his schoolless village, and absolutely lacking in money or
influence, ("svyazi"--connections, is the Russian version of "pull,") to
the position of multi-millionaire and co-worker with the Emperor, is
amazing almost beyond belief. In reality, it is as simple as the rise of
an American newsboy, of an Edison or a Carnegie to a position of power
in the United States. Fate, circumstances, as well as their own
personality are the factors in all these cases; and in every similar
case.
Moreover, there is in Russia no eternally impassable barrier of caste,
but there is a genuine democracy which is not easy to define, but is
very easily felt. For instance, the title of "Prince," (to which, unlike
that of "Count" or "Baron"--conferrable--one must be born, runs the
rule, with exceptions for such national heroes as Suvaroff,) counts for
nothing or approximately that, unless its owner possesses, in addition,
the wealth, character, learning or other characteristics which would
render him a man of mark without it.
There are other interesting instances of peasants who have risen high in
Russia, and Mr. Tchelisheff is their worthy successor. The founder of
the great silversmiths' firm of Ovtchinnikoff was a serf. His successors
have made it their rule, "out of gratitude to God," to maintain and
educate a certain number of poor boys, who, when their intellectual and
technical training is completed, are free to remain with the firm as
valued artists or to go forth independently. When the Emperor Alexander
II. celebrated the twenty-fifth anniversary of his accession to the
throne, all the Sovereigns of Europe sent him magnificent presents.
These are assembled in his library, at the Winter Palace, Petrograd; and
in the centre--accorded that place by the Russians with equal good
feeling, good taste, and justice--is a large group in solid silver,
representing a huge mass of rock upon whose pinnacles stand figures
representing the different parts of the empire--Little Russia, Siberia,
and so forth. The inscription reads: "To the Tzar-Liberator from the
Liberated Serf." It was made by the Ovtchinnikoffs and presented by
another ex-serf, who had become a millionaire railway magnate.
Mustard Seed No. 2 from America to Russia falls into a somewhat
different category. It more nearly resembles one of those grains of
antique wheat found in a tomb and sprouting vigorously when finally
planted in congenial, helpful soil. I trust that my comparison may not
be regarded as disrespectful. One could not, willingly, be disrespectful
to the calendar, any more than to the thermometer!
Russia, by adhering to the Julian Calendar and refusing to adopt the
Gregorian, has now fallen thirteen days behind the rest of the world. It
falls behind about a day for every century. There are several reasons
why Russia has not, up to now, remedied the serious inconvenience caused
by this conflict of dates. One is--the Gregorian Calendar is Roman
Catholic, and named after a Pope. It is, also, inaccurate. Worst of all,
the rectification might--almost infallibly would, under ordinary
circumstances--cause trouble at the outset, especially in one
incalculably important direction.
Russian scientists long ago worked out a new calendar far more accurate
than the Gregorian for thousands of years, and when the change is made
that calendar will be adopted. The fundamental difficulty lies in the
fact that all the people whose saints' days must inevitably be skipped
for the first year in the process of rectification will inevitably feel
that they are being robbed of their guardian angels, that they are
"orphans"--a mournful word greatly beloved of the Russian masses under
multiform circumstances, both material and spiritual--and orphaned in a
peculiarly distressing and irrevocable way. They might even feel when
their saints' days came around quite correctly the next year that some
spurious adventurer--Angel of Darkness--was being foisted upon them.
Fanatics and professional mischief-makers would certainly seize with
avidity upon such a godsend of a chance, unparalleled since the days of
Peter the Great's father, when the Patriarch Nikon had the errors of the
copyists in the Scriptures and church service books corrected. But the
present war has fused all parties, united all hearts in patriotism,
loyalty to, and confidence in their Emperor and created a fervid
inclination amounting to enthusiasm to accept even the most drastic
reforms he may make cheerfully, unquestionably, as for the good of the
fatherland.
On the matter of the calendar reform America has for many years past
been exerting a steadily increasing influence. During the past twenty
years the steady flow of immigrants from Russia and other countries
belonging to the Orthodox Catholic Church of the East, (Greco-Russian,)
has increased to a great volume, and it seems destined to attain still
greater proportions when the war is over. These people are obliged to
work and keep holiday by the Gregorian calendar and to worship by the
Julian. This entails hardships.
For example, a devout Russian who has been forced to remain idle on our
Christmas and New Year's Days must sacrifice his pay--sometimes risk or
lose his job--if he wishes to observe the feasts of his own church. A
reform of the calendar would be hailed with joy by innumerable such
immigrants, who have been over here long enough to consider calmly the
practical aspects of a temporary dislocation of saints' days. The
ecclesiastical authorities in this country have frequently protested,
in print, both here and in Russia, and I have been informed that the
Holy Synod has been appealed to, more than once, to induce it to cast
its influence into the balance with that of the scientists and the
governmental authorities, who have been discussing the matter for years
past, and hesitating over the probable consequences of action--a case of
peasant joining hands with the rulers of Russia, once more like Mr.
Tchelisheff and the Emperor Nicholas--or the people of the United States
and the President--to secure a needed reform!
And these same peasant-immigrants in America have, without the shadow of
a doubt, already written back to their relatives and friends in the old
country--and very frequently--about the difficulties of the antiquated
Julian calendar, and these, in turn, can disseminate common sense about
the change in a way which the Government, aided by the Holy Synod and
the explanations of home-staying parish priests, unaided, could never
effect. When the fitting time arrives, perhaps the Russian Government
will avail itself of just this argument, among others--the welfare of
friends in distant America. There has never been a propitious time in
Russia to make that calendar reform since the reign of Peter the Great
until now. And America may fairly be said to have brought from its dark
hiding place the mustard seed which has been trying so long to
germinate, and imparted to it a vivifying impulse.