"Through this letter I wish to explain myself to you, and ask

you not to refuse me the privilege of representing to the

Emperor, most humbly, the motives which prompted me to give

the zemstvo permission to assert itself. According to public

opinion, in which I concur unreservedly, Russia is, at

present, facing an epoch of anarchy and revolutionary

movement. What is going on is, by far, no mere agitation by

the youth. The youth stands forth only as a reflection of the

general state prevailing in society. This state is most

dangerous and terrible for our entire country, as well as for

all of us, and particularly so for the holy person of the

Emperor. It is, therefore, the duty of every truly loyal

subject to ward off the disastrous calamity with any and all

means at his disposal.

{567}

A short time ago, I had the good fortune to be received by the

Emperor, and to tell him, straightforwardly and truly, to the

best of my effort and knowledge, about the present state of

society. I endeavored to explain to him that what is going on

is not a riot, but a revolution; that the Russian people is

thus being drawn into a revolution, which it does not desire,

and which can be forestalled by the Emperor. Yet there is but

one way out of it, just one, and that is by the Emperor

placing confidence in the strength of society and of the

masses. In the depths of my soul I am firmly convinced that if

the Emperor only wanted to confidently group these powers

around himself, Russia would free itself from all the terrors

of the impending disturbance, and would support its Czar, his

will, and his absolute sovereignty. In view of the state of

mind of all the people, who are filled with fear and horror

over the things referred to above, it is really beyond human

power to refuse them to speak about that which is vexing and

tormenting everybody so fearfully."

"The opening of the next year (1905) was marked by the

appearance of a new element in revolution. Certainly, there

had been strikes and riots in the great cities before; there

had been peasant risings and other forms of economic agitation

in various parts. But as a whole the revolutionary movement as

such had been inspired, directed, and even carried out by the

educated classes—the students, the journalists, the doctors,

barristers, and other professional men. It had been almost

limited to that great division of society which in Russia is

called ‘The Intelligence.’ … It was ‘the Intelligence’ who

hitherto had fought for the revolution. … At length the

first-fruits of their toilsome propaganda, continued through

forty years, were seen, and the revolutionary workman

appeared.

"He was ushered in by Father George Gapon, at that time a

rather simple-hearted priest, with a rather childlike faith in

God and the Tsar, and a certain genius for organization. His

personal hold upon the working classes was probably due to

their astonishment that a priest should take any interest in

their affairs, outside their fees. … Father Gapon, with his

thin line of genius for organization, had gathered the

workmen’s groups or trade unions of St. Petersburg into a

fairly compact body, called ‘The Russian Workmen’s Union,’ of

which he was President as well as founder. In the third week

in January the men at the Putiloff iron works struck because

two of their number had been dismissed for belonging to their

union. At once the Neva iron and ship-building works, the

Petroffsky cotton works, the Alexander engine works, the

Thornton cloth works, and other great factories on the banks

of the river or upon the industrial islands joined in the

strike, and in two days some 100,000 work-people were ‘out.’

"With his rather childlike faith in God and the Tsar, Father

Gapon organized a dutiful appeal of the Russian workmen to the

tender-hearted autocrat whose benevolence was only thwarted by

evil counsellors and his ignorance of the truth. The petition

ran, in part, as follows:—

"‘We workmen come to you for truth and protection. We have

reached the extreme limits of endurance. We have been

exploited, and shall continue to be exploited under your

bureaucracy. The bureaucracy has brought the country to the

verge of ruin and by a shameful war is bringing it to its

downfall. We have no voice in the heavy burdens imposed on us.

We do not even know for whom or why this money is wrung from

the impoverished people, and we do not know how it is

expended. This is contrary to the Divine laws, and renders

life impossible. It is better that we should all perish, we

workmen and all Russia. Then good luck to the capitalists and

exploiters of the poor, the corrupt officials and robbers of

the Russian people!

"‘Throw down the wall that separates you from your people.

Russia is too great and her needs are too various for

officials to rule. National representation is essential, for

the people alone know their own needs. Direct that elections

for a constituent assembly be held by general secret ballot.

That is our chief petition. Everything is contained in that.

If you do not reply to our prayer, we will die in this square

before your palace. We have nowhere else to go. Only two paths

are open to us—to liberty and happiness or to the grave.

Should our lives serve as the offering of suffering Russia, we

shall not regret the sacrifice, but endure it willingly.’

"On the morning of Sunday, January 22, 1905, about 15,000

working men and women formed into a procession to carry this

petition to the Tsar in his Winter Palace upon the great

square of government buildings. They were all in their Sunday

clothes; many peasants had come up from the country in their

best embroideries; they took their children with them. In

front marched Father Gapon and two other priests wearing

vestments. With them went the ikons, or holy pictures of

shining brass and silver, and a portrait of the Tsar. As the

procession moved along, they sang, ‘God save our people. God

give our orthodox Tsar the victory.’

"So the Russian workmen made their last appeal to the autocrat

whom they called their father. They would lay their griefs

before him, they would see him face to face, they would hear

his comforting words. But the father of his people had

disappeared into space. As the procession entered the square,

the soldiers fired volley after volley upon them from three

sides. The estimate of the killed and wounded was about 1500.

That Sunday—January 9th in Russian style—is known as Bloody

Sunday or Vladimir’s Day, after the Grand Duke Vladimir who

was supposed to have given the orders. Next morning Father

Gapon wrote to his Union: ‘There is no Tsar now. Innocent

blood has flowed between him and the people.’"

_Henry W. Nevinson,

The Dawn in Russia, Introduction.

(Harper’s, New York)._

If the atrocity of the 9th of January was intended to

terrorize and paralyze the opposition to absolutism it failed.

It maddened the more violent revolutionists, and increasingly

desperate enterprises of assassination were provoked. The

provocation was made greater by the appointment of Trepoff,

notorious for brutality of temper, to a newly created office,

of Governor-General of St. Petersburg. On the 17th of February

the Grand Duke Sergius, uncle to the Tsar, Governor-General of

Moscow, and conspicuously heartless and foul in his exercise

of power, was assassinated as he drove through the streets.

Strikes and riotous outbreaks were of constant occurrence in

the industrial cities, especially violent in Warsaw, Lodz, and

other Polish towns.

{568}

The Tsar issued a piteous manifesto on the 3d of March,

appealing for a "rally round the throne" by all "who, true to

Russia’s past, honestly and conscientiously have a care for

all the affairs of the state such as we have ourselves." On

the same day he published a rescript in which he said: "I am

resolved henceforth, with the help of God, to convene the

worthiest men, possessing the confidence of the people and

elected by them, to participate in the elaboration and

consideration of legislative measures." But, even if this

expressed the personal disposition of the weak-willed

sovereign, it promised nothing to correspond to it in the

action of government; as was shown by the promotion of Trepoff

to be Assistant-Minister of the Interior and Chief of Police.

Prince Mirsky, baffled in his undertakings and hopeless of

good from his service, had resigned the Ministry of the

Interior, and his successor, M. Buliguine, held the office but

a short time. M. Serguei Yulievitch Witte, former Minister of

Finance, and latterly President of the Imperial Ministers, now

acquired a substantial premiership in the administration,

which does not seem to have belonged to his office before.

Nothing of satisfaction came from the December promises of

reformed law. Bureaucratic commissions were understood to be

working on measures to make good the Tsar’s word, but months

passed with no result. There were fitful relaxations of the

censorship of the press, so capricious that no editor could

know what he might and might not say.

In April, religious liberty was proclaimed, with special

rights and privileges reserved to the Russian orthodox church.

M. Witte had advocated a separation of the church from the

state; but that was beyond hope. There must, however, have

been an important weakening of church influence in the

government, since the long despotic procurator-general of the

Holy Synod, M. Pobiedonostzeff, resigned before the close of

the year.

Early in the summer the heads of provincial zemstvos held

another meeting, and discussed the popular demand for a

constitutional and representative government without

restraint. Then the Czar gave them a friendly audience, and

declared to them that "the admission of elected

representatives to works of state will be regularly

accomplished"; but this was followed speedily by an official

explanation that his majesty’s remarks must not be understood

as containing "any indication of the possibility of modifying

the fundamental law of the empire." This was to check an eager

leaping of the public mind to high hopes.

On the 19th of August the long wavering imperial mind seemed

brought to a definite intention at last, in a proclamation

which summoned a national assembly, or duma, to meet "not

later than the middle of January, 1906."

"The Empire of Russia," said the Tsar in his preamble, "is

formed and strengthened by the indestructible solidarity of

the Tsar with the people and the people with the Tsar. The

concord and union of the people and the Tsar are a great moral

force, which has created Russia in the course of centuries by

protecting her from all misfortunes and all attacks, and has

constituted up to the present time a pledge of unity,

independence, integrity, material well-being, and intellectual

development. Autocratic Tsars, our ancestors, constantly had

that object in view, and the time has come to follow out their

good intentions, and to summon elected representatives from

the whole of Russia to take a constant and active part in the

elaboration of laws, attaching for this purpose to the higher

state institutions a special consultative body, entrusted with

the preliminary elaboration and discussion of measures, and

with the examination of the state budget. It is for this

reason that, while preserving the fundamental law regarding

autocratic power, we have deemed it well to form a State Duma,

and to approve regulations for the elections to this Duma."

By the terms of the call it will be seen, "the fundamental law

regarding autocratic power" was preserved with care. And, said

the proclamation, "we reserve to ourselves entirely the care

of perfecting the organization of the duma." It was to have no

power to initiate legislation, but only to discuss and pass

judgment upon measures brought before it by the ministers of

the Tsar, who thus held fast to the substance of his

autocratic power.

The Duma was to consist of 412 members, representing 50

governments and the military province of the Don, and only 28

members representing towns. It was to be elected for five

years, unless dissolved sooner by the Tsar. Its meetings were

to be secret, except as the president, in his discretion,

might admit the reporters of the Press.

The limited functions proposed for the Duma, and the

indefinite prescription of procedure in its election, left not

much in the Tsar’s project of a national assembly to satisfy

the nation. In September a large meeting of representatives of

the zemstvos, from all parts of the Empire, was held privately

at Moscow, and it was there agreed that they should exert

themselves to secure as many seats in the coming Duma as

possible, with a view to making it instrumental in the

movement for something better. The ultimate aim of present

endeavor was defined in a programme which included: a

representative national legislature; a systematic budget

system; freedom of conscience, speech, press, meeting and

association; inviolability of person and home; equal rights of

all citizens; equal responsibility of all officials and

citizens under the law; the abolition of passports.

In October, on the 21st, the workingmen organized their first

great general strike, on the railways, which paralyzed travel

and traffic, except as the government could operate some

military trains. The strikers made bold demands, presented to

Witte on the 24th: "The claims of the working classes," they

said, "must be settled by laws constituted by the will of the

people and sanctioned by all Russia. The only solution is to

announce political guarantees for freedom and the convocation

of a Constituent Assembly, elected by direct, universal and

secret suffrage. Otherwise the country will be forced into

rebellion." Witte replied: "A Constituent Assembly is for the

present impossible.

{569}

Universal suffrage would, in fact, only give preëminence to

the richest classes, because they could influence all the

voting by their money. Liberty of the press and of public

meeting will be granted very shortly. I am myself strongly

opposed to all persecution and bloodshed, and I am willing to

support the greatest amount of liberty possible. … But there

is not in the entire world a single cultivated man who is in

favor of universal suffrage." Two days after receiving this

reply the Council of Labor Delegates, or "Strike Committee,"

declared a general strike of workmen throughout Russia, and

about a million workingmen are said to have taken the risk of

starvation by dropping work.

No doubt it was that evidence of determination in the

revolutionary spirit of the country which drew from the Tsar,

on the 30th of October, the famous ukase which was

characterized hastily at the time as "the Magna Charta of

Russia," "the surrender of autocracy," the founding of

constitutional government. In reality, the document was no

more than an injunction to the ministers of the autocrat to

carry out his "absolute will" in certain matters, most of

which were set forth with characteristic vagueness of terms.

The following is a translation of the entire manifesto, as

communicated to the Government of the United States from its

embassy at St. Petersburg:

By the grace of God we, Nicholas Second, Emperor and Autocrat

of all the Russias, Tsar of Poland, Grand Duke of Finland,

etc.

The rioting and agitation in the capitals and in many

localities of our Empire has filled our heart with great and

deep affliction. The welfare of the Russian Emperor is united

with the welfare of the people, and its troubles are his

troubles. The agitation which has broken out may bring

confusion among the people and threaten the entirety and unity

of our Empire.

The solemn vow of the imperial service commands us, with all

the strength of intelligence and of our power, to endeavor to

stop as quickly as possible agitations so dangerous to the

Empire. In ordering the competent authorities to take measures

to avert the disorders, the troubles, and violence, and to

guard peaceful people who are eager to fulfill quietly the

duties placed upon them, we have found it necessary, in order

to insure the proper execution of the general measures marked

out by us, to unify the action of the supreme government.

We lay upon the government the fulfillment of our absolute

will:

1. To grant to the population the inviolable basis of free

citizenship, on the ground of actual inviolable personality,

freedom of conscience, speech, meeting, and unions;

2. Without stopping the intended elections for the State Duma,

to include now in the participation of the Duma as far as

possible, in view of the corresponding short term which

remains before the convocation of the Duma, those classes of

the population which up to now were entirely deprived of the

right to vote and to allow in future the further development

of the element of a general right of election which is to be

established by new legislation; and

3. To establish as an inviolable rule that no law shall take

effect without its confirmation by the State Duma and that the

persons elected by the population should be guaranteed the

possibility of actual control over the legal activity of the

persons appointed by us.

We call on all the true sons of Russia to remember their

duties toward their fatherland, to assist in combating these

unheard-of agitations, and together with us to unite all their

strength in establishing quietness and peace in their country.

Given in Peterhof on the 17th day of October in the year of

our Lord 1905 and the eleventh year of our reign.

(Signed in his own hand.)

NICHOLAS.

At the same time, the ministers of the autocrat were enjoined

to "abstain from any interference in the elections of the

duma;" they were to "maintain the prestige of the duma and

confidence in its labors, and not resist its decisions so long

as they are not inconsistent with the historic greatness of

Russia." In the exercise of executive power they should embody

"(1) straightforwardness and sincerity in the confirmation of

civil liberty;"

"(2), a tendency toward the abolition of exclusive laws;"

"(3), the coordination of the activity of all the organs of

government;"

"(4), the avoidance of repressive measures in respect to

proceedings which do not openly menace society or the state."

These orders and injunctions from the autocracy to the

bureaucracy were to be the constitution of government for

which Russia had made demands. They did not satisfy the

demand—or satisfied only the small party who were afterwards

called "Octobrists," because they asked for no more than was

granted in this ukase of October 30, 1905. The general strike

was not called off, but demands for a Constituent Assembly

were reiterated persistently. Agitation was kept alive, and

with it the murderous warfare waged by revolutionists against

high officials and the police. At the same time, reactionary

officials and army officers, enraged by what the Tsar had

done, stirred up mobs in various parts of the country to

attack the Jews, and add to the state of public disorder, thus

furnishing arguments for a fresh resort to repressive measures

by the military arm. Presently there were serious outbreaks of

mutiny in army and navy, at Odessa, Kronstadt, and Sevastopol,

and all the foundations of public order seemed really, for a

time, to be breaking up.

It is evident there was serious alarm in the circles of the

autocracy. Pobiedonostzeff, the bigoted Procurator of the Holy

Synod, and Trepoff, the savage head of the police, resigned.

On the 4th of November an amnesty to political offenders was

proclaimed, and the ancient liberties of Finland were

restored, by a decree which abolished that of February, 1899

(see, in Volume VI., FINLAND), and that also annulled a later

military law, of 1901, by which the Finnish army had been put

on the Russian footing.

These signs of yielding to the claims "of the nation soon gave

place, however, to symptoms on the reactionary side of revived

courage and obstinacy among the keepers and masters of the

Tsar’s mind and will. A manifesto on the 12th of November

declared that reforms would not be possible till the country

was quieted. Another on the 13th proclaimed martial law in

Poland; whereat the "strike committee" called another strike

in sympathy with Poland.

{570}

On the 14th Witte published an appeal to the workmen, saying:

"Brothers! Workmen! Go back to your work and cease from

disorder. Have pity on your wives and children, and turn a

deaf ear to mischievous counsels. The Tsar commands us to

devote special attention to the labor question, and to that

end has appointed a Ministry of Commerce and Industry, which

will establish just relations between masters and men. Only

give us time, and I will do all that is possible for you. Pay

attention to the advice of a man who loves you and wishes you

well." The renewed strike was not successful. Not many of the

workingmen would face the suffering from non-employment which

they had gone through already. The attempt was ended on the

20th; but the Committee which called it, in annulling the

order, enjoined the workers of the Empire to organize "for the

final encounter between all Russia and the bloody monarchy now

dragging out its last days."

Meantime, on the 17th, the Tsar sought to conciliate the

peasants by reducing for one year the payments on land that

were due under the land distribution which went with

emancipation in 1861, and remitting them entirely after

January, 1907.

See (in Volume IV.)

SLAVERY, MEDIEVAL AND MODERN: RUSSIA.

On the 20th of November a Peasants’ Congress of 300 delegates

met in Moscow and formulated demands for the nationalization

of land and for a constituent assembly. The delegates were

arrested. An alarming mutiny in the fleet and army at

Sevastopol broke out on the 26th, but it was soon suppressed.

Two days later the whole body of employees in the postal and

telegraphic service at Moscow began a most troublesome strike,

which spread from there and was continued for some weeks. Mr.

Nevinson, who was in Moscow at the time, describes it in one

of his chapters:

"In those happy weeks when freedom still was young and living,

two things ruled the country—speech and the strike, the word

and the blow. The strike was everywhere felt. No letter or

telegram went or came. Each town in Russia was isolated, and

the whole Empire stood severed from the world. … In Moscow the

cooks struck, and paraded the streets with songs never heard

in the drawing-room. The waiters struck, and heavy proprietors

lumbered about with their own plates and dishes. The

nursemaids struck for Sundays out. The housemaids struck for

rooms with windows, instead of cupboards under the stairs, or

sections from the water closets. Schoolboys struck for more

democratic masters and pleasanter lessons. Teachers struck for

higher pay. … But at the back of the strikes and all the

revolutionary movement lay the motive force of speech. … After

these centuries of suppression, all Russia was revelling in a

spiritual debauch of words."

On the 6th of December General Sakharoff, formerly Minister of

War and now Governor-General of a district on the Volga, was

shot by a woman, to avenge the sufferings he had caused to the

peasants. On the 7th the Strike Committee called on the

workpeople to withdraw their money from the savings-banks;

and, a little later, a joint manifesto, issued by that

committee and committees of Peasants, Social Democrats, and

Social Revolutionists, appealed generally to the people, not

only to withdraw money from the savings banks, but "to refuse

to pay taxes, or to take bank-notes, or to subscribe to

loans," as a means of crippling the government financially.

All papers which published this manifesto were suppressed and

their editors arrested.

Then, in the last twelve days of December, came the fatal

rising at Moscow, which the government, forewarned by its

spies, precipitated, while the revolutionists’ preparations

were but half made, and which it crushed mercilessly, with

ease. From a diary of the occurrences of these tragical days

at Moscow, given in the report of the resident American Consul

to Ambassador Meyer, at St. Petersburg, the following entries

are taken:

"_December_ 24.

Barricades were continually built during days and nights. The

revolutionists were in hope that about 20,000 or 30,000

workmen from the factories in the suburbs would enter the city

and join them, but this was not accomplished, as the military

forces were sufficient to prevent this. The revolutionists

spread a rumor amongst the workmen that the soldiers were in

sympathy with the strikers and that they would not fire on the

mob and would join their ranks, but this rumor turned out to

be untrue, as the troops were loyal to the Government. …

"_December_ 27.

At 6 o’clock P. M. the house where the chief of the secret

police, Mr. Voilochenkoff, resides, was surrounded by a

revolutionary party and by their insistent demands the front

door was opened. Six men rushed into his apartments and

arrested the chief, and read the death sentence of the

revolutionary party to him. His wife and three children

pleaded to the revolutionists for mercy, but the

revolutionists would not listen to their pleading, and they

gave Mr. Voilochenkoff a short time to prepare for death and

then took him out into a side street where he was shot to

death, and his body left in the street. Disturbances and

shooting were carried on in the different parts of the city,

and new barricades erected.

"_December_ 31.

The troops bombarded the large Prochoroff spinning mills,

where a large number of revolutionists made their last stand.

Many houses in the vicinity of the mill were either burnt down

or wrecked by cannon balls. Many of the revolutionists and

strikers were killed, wounded, or captured and the weapons

confiscated. The general strike has been called off."

This was practically the end of the abortive rising. On the

5th of January, 1906, Ambassador Meyer wrote to the State

Department at Washington:

"In my cable of December 25 I stated that although fighting

had been stubborn and gatling guns had been used, I believed

that the estimates so far given out as to loss of life were

much exaggerated. It appears now that I was correct in my

surmise, for in a semi-official statement given by one of the

papers, from statistics taken at all the hospitals and

accident bureaus, the deaths were given as about 750 and the

wounded as a little over a thousand.

"I am glad to state that as yet I have heard of no injuries

occurring to American citizens in Moscow; in fact in all these

disturbances that have taken place in the various cities the

revolutionists and strikers have refrained in all instances

from attacking foreign consulates, and I believe this also

applies to the property of foreign individuals."

{571}

On the 29th of January Ambassador Meyer wrote to Washington:

"The revolutionary party seems to have spent its force for the

time being. Instead of aiding reforms, they have greatly

hampered them. By the attempted capture of Moscow, by their

riots and rebellions in other parts of the country, followed

by destruction of life and property, they have forced the

Government into repression and reactionary methods in order to

restore law and order. All this has necessarily caused a delay

in the classification of the newly enfranchised voters and has

given an excuse for a continued waste of precious time due to

bureaucratic formality.

"Some of the factions are finally waking up to the necessity

of giving attention to registration and a better comprehension

of the coming elections. The Constitutional-Democratic party

have decided by a large majority to take part in the elections

and the Douma. The Social Democrats have also decided to

participate. On the other hand, the Russian

Social-Revolutionaries, at their first meeting in Finland,

lately, voted in favor of a boycott of the elections.

"At its last meeting, the Constitutional-Democratic party, in

view of obstacles to free election campaigning which the local

authorities are using against all opposing parties, voted to

protest against the government policy, which in any way

impeded free elections to the Imperial Douma, and further

urged the most energetic participation of its members in the

approaching elections.

"At a meeting of the marshals of the nobility, held at Moscow

last week, the following resolutions were adopted: 1.That the

final settlement of the agrarian question should be made the

first task of the Douma. 2. That in deciding the agrarian

question, it should be based on the principle of inviolability

of private property."

RUSSIA: A. D. 1904-1905. War with Japan:

Siege and Surrender of Port Arthur.

See (in this Volume)

JAPAN: A. D. 1904 (FEBRUARY-AUGUST) and

1904-1905 (MAY-JANUARY)

RUSSIA: A. D. 1904-1905 (October-May).--War with Japan:

Voyage of the Baltic Fleet.

Its Destruction in the Battle of Tsushima.

See (in this Volume)

JAPAN: A. D. 1904-1905 (OCTOBER-MAY).

RUSSIA: A. D. 1904-1905 (September-March).

War with Japan: Campaign in Manchuria.

From the Battle of Liao-Yang to the end

of the Battle of Mukden.

See (in this Volume)

JAPAN: A. D. 1904-1905 (SEPTEMBER-MARCH).

RUSSIA: A. D. 1904-1909.

General Consequences in Europe of the Weakening of Russian

Prestige and Power by the Russo-Japanese War.

See (in this Volume)

EUROPE: A. D. 1904-1909.

RUSSIA: A. D. 1905.

Action with other Powers in forcing Financial Reforms

in Macedonia on Turkey.

See (in this Volume)

TURKEY: A. D. 1905-1908.

RUSSIA: A. D. 1905 (February-November).

Naval Mutiny.

Army Revolt.

Peasant Risings.

Conflict in the Caucasus.

The most serious of the revolutionary outbreaks of the year

was that of mutiny in the navy. "Already in February the

sailors of the Black Sea fleet, instigated by the

revolutionary propaganda, had burned down the barracks at

Sebastopol and assaulted their officers, and on June 27 the

crew of the ‘Kniaz Potemkin,’ the principal battle-ship of the

Black Sea fleet, mutinied at sea while the squadron of which

it formed part was manoeuvring, and killed nearly all its

officers. The mutineers were in league with the working men at

Odessa, who at the same time invaded the harbor, and,

accompanied by a riotous mob, plundered and burnt in all

directions. Property of immense value was consumed, and some

of the troops refused to fire on the rioters. Ultimately fresh

troops were brought up, the ‘Kniaz Potemkin’ sailed away to

the Roumanian port of Constanza, where it was surrendered to

the Roumanian authorities, who gave up the ship to the

Russians, and the crew was landed and disarmed. The crew of

another battle-ship, the ‘Georgei Pobiedonosets,’ took part in

the mutiny, but surrendered to the Russian authorities at

Odessa. Riots also took place at the same time at the seaports

of Reval, Riga, Libau, and Kronstadt, where the dockers were

joined by the navy men and struck for an increase of wages. …

On July 10 Count Schouvaloff, Prefect of Police at Moscow, was

assassinated, and a general strike was proclaimed at Minsk. …

In the Baltic provinces the peasants, who are Letts,

constantly attacked the landed proprietors, who are German in

race and speech; many of the latter were killed, the municipal

buildings at Reval, Riga and Mittau were sacked. … In

September the conflict which had been going on between the

Tartars and the Armenians in the Caucasus culminated in a

series of horrible massacres, accompanied by much destruction

of property. At Baku most of the naphtha wells were destroyed

by incendiary fires, and very much of the oil industry was

ruined. The Tartars, carrying green banners, proclaimed a holy

war against the Armenians, many thousands of whom were killed.

… On November 25 an organized revolt took place of the

soldiers, sailors and workmen of Sebastopol. There was no

rioting, but several officers were killed, and for some days

the town was in the hands of the rebels. The revolt was only

suppressed on November 30, when a regular battle took place

between the rebels and 20,000 troops that had been brought up

against them. Forts and loyal ships fired on mutinous ships,

and the barracks held by the rebels had to be bombarded before

they were forced to surrender. … Other mutinies of troops took

place at the same time at Warsaw and in other places."

_The Annual Register 1905,

pages 313-323._

RUSSIA: A. D. 1905 (April-August).

The Tsar’s Decree of Religious Liberty.

Minister Witte’s enlightened Memorial.

The Emptiness of Results.

Early in May, 1905, there was announcement that the Tsar, on

the morning of the Russian Easter Day, had published a decree

proclaiming absolute religious liberty to all his subjects.

Previous tolerance of all religions in Russia had been subject

to important limitations. No member of the state church could

leave it to enter another without losing all his civil rights,

and no church other than the Orthodox could proselyte.

Furthermore, when members of the Russian Church and those of

any other church married, it was necessary to have the

ceremony performed by an Orthodox priest, and the law insisted

that the children of such marriages be brought up in the

Orthodox faith. These restrictions were particularly hard on

the Old Believers, as they are called,—a body which separated

from the Orthodox Church two and a half centuries ago and has

suffered all kinds of persecution. The new ukase recognized

the various orders of priesthood among the Old Believers, and

gave them the right to celebrate marriage. To all the

dissenting sects—Roman Catholics, Lutherans, Jews, and

others—is accorded the right to erect houses of worship

without restriction.

{572}

The Tsar’s decree of entire religious freedom was known soon

to have been the fruit of a remarkably broad minded memorial

addressed to him by M. Witte, the President of his Council of

Ministers, and a translation of that memorial was published in

the May issue of _The Contemporary Review_. It pictured a

state of paralysis in the Russian Church, consequent on its

bondage to the State. "Both the ecclesiastical and the secular

press," said the writer, "remark with equal emphasis upon the

prevailing lukewarmness of the inner life of the Church,—upon

the alienation of the flock, particularly of the educated

classes of society, from its spiritual guides; the absence in

sermons of a living word; the lack of pastoral activity on the

part of the clergy, who in the majority of instances confine

themselves to the conduct of divine service and the

fulfillment of ritual observances; the entire collapse of the

ecclesiastical parish community, with its educational and

benevolent institutions; the red-tapism in the conduct of

diocesan or consistorial business, and the narrowly

bureaucratic character of the institutions grouped about the

Synod. It was from Dostoyevski that we first heard that word

of evil omen, ‘The Russian Church is suffering from

paralysis.’"

This condition M. Witte attributes to the position in which

the Church was placed by Peter the Great. "The chief aim of

the ecclesiastical reforms of Peter I. was to reduce the

Church to the level of a mere government institution pursuing

purely political ends. And, as a matter of fact, the

government of the Church speedily became merely one of the

numerous wheels of the complicated government machine. On the

soil of an ecclesiastical government robbed by bureaucratism

of all personal elements the dry scholastic life-shunning

school arose spontaneously. This policy of coercing the mind

of the Church, though it may have been attended for the moment

by a certain measure of political gain, subsequently inflicted

a terrible loss. Hence that decline in ecclesiastical life

with which we now have to deal."

The wise President of the Tsar’s Council made so much

impression on the mind of his master as to draw from him the

ukase of general religious freedom; but three months later, in

the August number of _The American Review of Reviews_,

Dr. E. J. Dillon, whose intimate knowledge of Russian affairs

is well known, described how effectually the decree had been

smothered by the bureaucracy, which is stronger than the Tsar.

He wrote: "The most welcome of all the concessions emanating

from the throne was that which Nicholas II. bestowed upon his

subjects last Easter Sunday. Inspired and drafted by M. Witte,

it was at first spoken of as liberty of conscience, but was

soon afterward seen to amount to nothing more than religious

toleration. And since then the bureaucracy has touched and

killed it."

RUSSIA: A. D. 1905 (June-October).

Ending of the War with Japan.

Mediation by the President cf the United States.

The Peace Treaty of Portsmouth.

See (in this Volume)

JAPAN: A. D. 1905 (JUNE-OCTOBER).

RUSSIA: A. D. 1905-1907.

The Recent Russian Political Parties.

As explained by Mr. Maurice Baring in his interesting book

entitled _A Year in Russia_, the crystallization of

political parties in Russia began after the issue of the

Manifesto of October, 1905. The most important was that of the

Constitutional Democrats, nicknamed the "Cadets," a name

formed from the letters "K. D." Similarly the party called

Social Revolutionaries are nicknamed "S. R’s." and the Social

Democrats "S. D’s." The party of the Constitutional Democrats

was the product of a combination of Zemstvo members who had

previously been united in a "League of Liberation" with the

professional classes, whom Professor Milioukov had brought

together in a "Union of Unions," which represented the great

mass of educated Russia—the "Intelligenzia." This combination

of the professional class with the Zemstvoists, who had more

political experience than others could enjoy in Russia, was

mainly the important work of Professor Milioukov.

RUSSIA: A. D. 1906.

The First Duma.

Election of Representatives.

Its Conflict with the Government and its Dissolution.

Rise of M. Stolypin.

The Instigated Massacres (Pogroms).

In January, 1906, when the Duma promised by the Tsar on the

19th of the previous August should have met, the conditions in

the country were such that the Government dared not permit the

meeting to be held, and it was postponed without date. After

some weeks a more submissive state of order was restored, and

the meeting was appointed for the 10th of the following May.

The elections were held in March, and Ambassador Meyer

described the system on which they were conducted in an

extended despatch to the State Department at Washington, from

which the following is borrowed:

"The total number of members of the Duma, when the elections

shall have finally been completed, will be 501. The elections

are, however, not carried on the same day throughout the

country. Governors and vice-governors, prefects of cities and

their lieutenants cannot vote in their departments, nor can

members of the army or navy who are on active service, or

persons doing police duty in governments or cities when

elections are taking place.

"The voters are divided into classes, and that it may be

more clearly shown I have made the following table;

------------------------------------------------------------

Peasants.

Clergy

Cities not in special list

Volosts

Workmen

-------------------------> Delegates -> Electors -> Duma Members

Landed proprietors

and special cities.

-------------------------------------> Electors -> Duma Members

------------------------------------------------------------

{573}

"From this it will be seen that the peasants are in a class by

themselves and, as a matter of fact, in the present elections

are not given an opportunity of expression, as it is the volosts

(elected at the mir, in most instances, before the Duma was

even granted) that choose the delegates. The volosts, workmen,

clergy (not lauded proprietors), voters of cities (not in

special list), and class C of lauded proprietors, all choose

delegates. These delegates, in turn, select electors, as do

also landed proprietors, and qualified voters of cities on the

special list. The electors vote for Duma members in their

appropriate electoral college, and their choice is confined to

a member of their own body. Therefore in every instance, in

order to become a member of the Duma, a candidate must be an

elector and previous to that a delegate, except in the case of

landed proprietors and voters of special cities. …

"It is noticeable that the large cities in European Russia are

limited to one member of the Duma, with the exception of

Moscow and St. Petersburg, the former having an allotment of

four and the latter of six.

"There is an exceptional provision with regard to the

procedure of the peasant electors. … Elections to the Duma,

with the exception cited as to the privilege of peasant

electors, are finally effected in the governments and

territories by the government electoral college, and in the

cities by the municipal electoral college."

Mr. Meyer reported further that an imperial manifesto had

announced that the Council of the Empire would in future

"consist of an equal number of elective members and members

nominated by the Emperor. It will be convoked annually by an

imperial ukase at the same time with the Duma. The two

assemblies will have equal legislative powers, and each can

exercise the same initiative in introducing bills or

interrogations. Every bill must be passed by both houses

before being sent to the Tsar for his signature and approval.

The elected members of the Council will be eligible for nine

years, a third being reelected every three years." Of the 98

elective members of the Council (one half of the body), 18

were to be chosen from the nobles, 50 from the zemstvo of each

government, 6 from the Orthodox Church, 6 from the

universities, 12 from the representatives of the Council of

Commerce and Industry, and 6 from representatives of the

Polish landed proprietors.

On the 7th of April Ambassador Meyer wrote to Washington

concerning the result of the elections: "The success of the

Constitutional Democrats has made a great impression on the

Government and created considerable nervousness. Witte is

really anxious to resign and go out of the country for a

much-needed rest. But he assured a mutual friend that he would

stay and serve the Emperor as long as His Majesty desired. The

elections so far have impressed upon his mind the want of

confidence which exists among the people as to his

administration. As he is without any supporters among the

elected members of the Duma, it is difficult to believe that

the Emperor will be able or even desirous of having him

continue to serve as premier after the Duma is organized."

This anticipation proved correct. M. Witte had withdrawn from

the ministerial premiership when the Duma assembled on the

10th of May, and M. Goremykin had taken his place.

There was conflict between the Duma and the Government from

the moment that the former adopted its reply to the opening

speech of the Tsar. With unanimity it demanded general amnesty

for past political offenses, abolition of the death penalty,

suspension of martial law, full civil liberty, universal

suffrage, abolition of the council of the empire, a review of

the fundamental law, responsibility of ministers and right of

interpellation, a forced expropriation of land, and a

guarantee of rights to trade unions.

M. Stolypin, Minister of the Interior, now coming to the front

of ministerial leadership, made his first speech in the Duma

on the 21st of June, and was assailed with cries of "Murderer"

and "Assassin" when he defended illegal acts of police officials

and provincial governors, in the suppression of disorder, and

declared his determination to maintain order. Among the

replies to him was one by Prince Urussoff, former Assistant

Minister of the Interior, who made a powerful attack on the

sinister methods of the Government—the "policy of massacre,"

as he named it—declaring that massacres were always organized

by secret forces. "Any investigation," he said, "of the

so-called ‘pogroms’ (massacres) will bring the investigator

face to face with the following certain symptoms; they are

identical in all cases; Firstly, a massacre is always preceded

by reports of its preparation, accompanied by the circulation

of appeals exciting the population and of one constant kind in

form and substance. They are accompanied by a certain kind of

stormy petrels in the person of little known representatives

of the dregs of the population. Then, too, the cause of the

massacre as officially announced is afterwards always without

exception found to be false. Furthermore, in these massacres

there is always to be found a certain similarity of plan which

gives these actions the character of chance. The murderers act

on the assumption of some kind of right, as though conscious

that they will not be punished, and only continue to act as

long as this confidence remains unshaken—after which the

massacre stops extraordinarily quickly and easily."

What Prince Urussoff had intimated, as to the instigation of

the massacres from high circles was declared most distinctly

and positively, three years later, by Prince Kropotkin, in a

letter to the London _Times_ of July 29, 1909. He wrote:

"Something which never has happened anywhere in Western Europe

happened then in Russia, as M. Obninsky, a member of the first

Duma, says in a terrible book of statistics he has published

in 1906 at Moscow, under the title, ‘A Half-Year of the

Russian Revolution.’ In a hundred different cities men of the

so-called ‘Black Hundreds’ came together on some public

square, received there the benediction of the clergy, sent

telegrams to the Palace circles in St. Petersburg, received

answers from them, and then went on killing the Jews, the

Armenians, the Poles, the Russian members of the Zemstvos, and

Russian ‘Intellectuals’ altogether, under the protection of

the military, the local police, and the local governors.

{574}

"For some time I could not believe that such _pogroms_

could have been organized from St. Petersburg by the

authorities. Now the evidence is overwhelming. We know that

proclamations inciting to _pogroms_ were printed by the

gendarmes in the Secret Police offices, we know from the

revelations of these gendarmes themselves that men and

officers were sent to the provinces with proclamations and

arms to organize the pogroms; and we know how the leaders of

the Union of Russian Men were petted and given money by the

Tsar and how they organized murders, wholesale and retail,

with the aid of members of the Secret Police; and here is the

net result which I have before me in a long, very long, list

compiled by the Law Review _Pravo_.

"This list is simply horrifying. The Constitution manifesto

was signed on October 30. The same day took place the

_pogrom_ at Tver; the Zemstvo house was burnt, and 24

persons were wounded. At Moscow, November 2, 30 wounded;

Odessa, October 31-November 3, more than 1,000 killed and

5,000 wounded; Kieff, October 31, 150 killed, 100 wounded;

Tomsk, November 3, 150 killed and burned, 76 heavily wounded

(all these, by the way, and many others are Russian towns);

Minsk, 100 killed, 400 wounded; Tiflis, November 2, more than

100 killed; and so on, and so on. … The result of similar

campaigns in different parts of Russia for twelve months only

in 1905-1906 was—killed, more than 14,000; executed, about

1,000; wounded and partly died from wounds, about 20,000;

arrested and imprisoned, mostly without judgment, 75,000. This

last figure was given in the Duma by Professor Kovalevsky on

May 2, 1906, in the presence of M. Stolypin, who did not

contest it."

On the 22d of July the Duma was dissolved by imperial command,

and the following manifesto to the people was published by the

Autocrat on the following day:

"Persons selected by the people were called to the

legislature. Trusting in the goodness of God, believing in the

happy and grand future of our people, we were expecting from

their labors the happiness and interest of the country. Great

reforms had been indicated by us in all that concerns the life

of the people, and our greatest care, which is to substitute

education for the ignorance of the people and to lessen the

difficulties of its life by improving the conditions under

which it cultivates the ground, was foremost. A painful ordeal

was reserved to our hopes. The elected of the nation, instead

of turning their attention to legislative labors, have entered

a field that was closed to them, and have begun to investigate

the doings of authorities established by us, to indicate to us

the imperfections of fundamental laws that can only be altered

by our imperial will, and to commit illegal acts, such as the

appeal addressed to the people of the Duma.

"The peasants, dazed by these disorders, without waiting for

the legal improvement to their position, gave themselves up,

in a great number of governments, to pillage and theft,

refusing to submit to the law or to legal authorities. …

"By dissolving the actual Duma of the Empire we testify to our

unalterable intention of maintaining, in all their force, the

laws concerning the establishment of that institution, and,

consequently, we have fixed, by our ukase given to the ruling

Senate on the 8th July instant, the convocation of the new

Duma on the 20th of February, 1907."

About two hundred members of the dissolved Duma went

immediately from St. Petersburg to Viborg, in Finland, and

held a meeting there, from which they published an address to

the "Citizens of all the Russias," signed by one hundred and

sixty of their number, protesting against the opposition which

the Duma had encountered from the Government in all its

undertakings, and practically refusing submission to its

dissolution. "In the place of the present Duma," they said,

"the Government promises to convoke a new one in seven months.

… For seven months the Government will act as it likes, will

wrestle with the movement of the people in order to obtain a

submissive and desirable Duma, and if it succeeds in entirely

crushing the movement of the people it will not convoke any

Duma at all. Citizens, stand firmly by the trampled rights of

the representatives of the people. Stand for the Duma of the

Empire. Russia must not remain one day without representatives

from the people. We have the means of obtaining this. The

Government has not the right without our consent to collect

taxes from the people, nor to call the people to military

service, and therefore, now, when the Government has dissolved

the Duma of the Empire, it is your right to refuse to supply

it with soldiers or money. If the Government, in order to

secure resources, makes loans, such loans, made without

consent of the representatives of the people, will henceforth

be invalid, and the Russian people will not recognize them and

will not pay for them. Consequently, until the representatives

of the people are convoked, do not pay a kopeck into the

treasury nor send a man to the army. Be firm in your refusal;

stand for your rights, all as one man. Against the united and

absolute will of the people no power whatever can resist.

Citizens, in this compulsory but inevitable struggle your

representatives will be with you."

This proved to be futile action. The Government was prompt in

arresting and imprisoning most of the signers of the appeal to

the people, and none of them was allowed to be returned to the

Second Duma when the new elections were held. Pending that

election, some very substantial gifts of imperial favor were

made to the peasants, to win their good will, but nothing

appears to have been remembered of the October injunctions of

the Tsar concerning the "confirmation of civil liberty." In

August, 4,500,000 acres of crown lauds were transferred by an

imperial ukase to the Peasants’ Bank, for sale to the peasants

on easy terms; and on the 18th of October another ukase

released them to a large extent from the restraints of the

communal system, and decreed the equality of all citizens

before the law. The following is part of the text of this

important decree, as communicated in translation to the

American government by Ambassador Meyer, and published in the

report of 1906 on Foreign Relations.

"The Czar orders, on the basis of the fundamental law of 1906,

that the following reforms be made:

"1. To accord all Russian subjects, without distinction of

origin, with exception of the aborigines, equal rights with

regard to the state service with persons of noble blood, and

at the same time to abolish all special privileges of dress

due either to official position or to the origin of the

wearer.

{575}

"2. Peasants and members of other classes formerly taxable are

freed (a) from the presentation of discharge papers on

entering an educational institution or the civil service;

further, from personal payment in kind and the performance of

communal duties during the whole time the persons in question

may be either in the educational institution or civil service;

(_b_) from the necessity of demanding for entry into holy

orders or a monastery the permission of the commune.

"3. The compulsory exclusion of peasant and other classes

formally taxable from the following ranks and careers is

abolished;

(_a_) From entering the civil service;

(_b_) from receiving rank;

(_c_) from receiving orders and other distinctions;

(_d_) from attaining learned grades and honors;

(_e_) from completing educational courses and

particularly from winning higher class rights.

"In all these cases the persons in question are allowed to

retain all the rights arising from their connections with

their commune, as well as the responsibilities thereof, until

they have freely withdrawn from the commune or entered into

other corporations of standing. With regard to the legal

standing of the persons in question, there shall serve as a

basis the regulations of the rank or profession which these

persons have won."

See, also, below,

RUSSIA: A. D. 1909 (APRIL).

Meantime, extensive plans of insurrection, with naval and

military mutiny, in five cities, had been formed and had

miscarried. The outbreak was premature at Sveaborg, late in

July, and the sailors who started it were quickly overcome.

The same failure occurred at Kronstadt, where the

revolutionists and mutinous troops took Fort Constantine and

the arsenal, but found no ammunition in the latter, and were

defenseless when surrounded by loyal forces. At Libau, Odessa,

and Sevastopol the intended rising was given up.

On the 25th of August a desperate plot of wholesale murder,

intended to include M. Stolypin among its victims, was carried

out by the explosion of a horribly destructive bomb at the

country house of that Minister, on Aptekarsky Island. M.

Stolypin was holding a reception, and the rooms were crowded

with officials and others, when four conspirators, three of

them dressed as gendarmes, drove up boldly, and were able,

either to enter the house with a bomb or to throw it through a

window. The effect of the explosion was so horribly

destructive that the house was torn to pieces and thirty

people were killed outright or injured mortally, besides an

equal number that received curable wounds. Two of the

Minister’s children were among the latter, and he himself

received slight injuries. The Governor of Penza, M. Koshoff,

who stood near him, was instantly killed. Two of the assassins

were among the killed and the other two were wounded and

captured. On the following day a young woman of the terrorist

organization slew General Min, at Peterhof railway station, by

shots from a revolver. He had been active in suppressing the

insurrection at Moscow.

In October Ambassador Meyer, after a trip into Poland and to

Odessa, reported as the result of his observations:

"On the whole, the revolutionary movement, for the time being,

has lost its momentum. A year ago it was on the crest of the

wave. Then a strike could be ordered and put in force without

any difficulty, but now the workmen refuse to be used for

political purposes or respond to the whims of the agitator.

The present conditions are liable to continue until the next

Duma, March 5. Yesterday, which was the first anniversary of

October 17 (Russian Style), it had to be given out by some of

the revolutionists that there would be strikes, uprisings, and

agitations throughout the country. But the day passed off

quietly. Mr. Stolypin is facing with much courage and

resolution the stupendous task which confronts him. He is

endeavoring to deal fairly, while at the same time it is

necessary to reestablish law and order."

On the 21st of December Count Alexei Ignatieff was

assassinated at Tver, while attending a meeting of the

provincial zemstvo, the assassin stating that he had acted

under orders of the Socialist revolutionary committee.

RUSSIA: A. D. 1906 (April).

Invitation of the Nations to a Second Peace Conference

by the Tsar.

See (in this Volume)

WAR, THE REVOLT AGAINST; A. D. 1907.

RUSSIA: A. D. 1906 (April).

At the Algeciras Conference on the Morocco Question.

See (in this Volume)

EUROPE A. D. 1905-1906.

RUSSIA: A. D. 1907 (August).

Convention with Great Britain containing Arrangements on

the subject of Persia, Afghanistan, and Tibet.

See EUROPE: A. D. 1907 (AUGUST).

RUSSIA: A. D. 1907.

The Second Duma and its Early Dissolution.

Increase of Radicalism among its Members.

The New Electoral Law, under which a "Workable" Third Duma

was elected.

M. Stolypin’s Policy.

The promise that a second Duma would be summoned to meet in

March, 1907, was fulfilled. Between the 21st of January and

the end of February elections were held, with results that

were exceedingly disappointing and irritating to the imperial

government. It strove hard, by arbitrary measures and vigorous

working of its police, to suppress the Constitutional

Democrats,—the party which it fears the most. It pursued their

leaders into exile or imprisonment, broke up their meetings,

harassed them so in the canvass and the election that the

return of deputies by the party was reduced from 185 in the

First Duma to 108; but, on the other hand, the Socialist

representation in the Second Duma was raised above that in the

First from 17 to 77, and the Octobrists elected 31 deputies,

gaining 18 more seats than they had filled before. On the

whole, as a consequence, the Second Duma held more radicalism

in its make-up, with less intelligence, than the First.

Its meetings were opened on the 6th of March, and soon gave

evidence that the antagonisms in the body were too extreme for

any influential political work. In June M. Stolypin accused

most of the Socialist members of being parties to the

revolutionary propaganda in the army and navy, and demanded

their suspension by the Duma. It refused to suspend them

without an investigation of the truth of the charge, and

appointed a committee to receive such evidence as the

government could bring. Thereupon the Tsar, by a manifesto

published on the 16th of June, dissolved the Second Duma as

summarily as he had dissolved the First, ordered new

elections, to begin on the 14th of September, and summoned the

Third Duma, then elected, to meet on November 14th.

{576}

At the same time a new electoral law was proclaimed, in

flagrant violation of the so-called Constitution of October

30, 1905, which had declared, as an "immutable rule,"

established by the "inflexible will" of the Tsar, that "no law

can ever come into force without the approval of the State

Duma." The new law was planned carefully and skilfully to

disfranchise great numbers in the classes of people which

autocracy fears; to add weight to the votes of the classes on

which it leans; to diminish the representation of industrial

cities, as well as of non-Russian districts,—Poland, Siberia,

etc.,—and, generally, to make a farce of the pretended

concession of representative and constitutional government

which the autocratic court had been playing for the amusement

of the country during the past two years.

The new electoral law accomplished its purpose of securing a

Duma that would keep workable relations with M. Stolypin. A

very intelligent English publicist, Dr. Dillon, who discusses

Foreign Politics every month in the _Contemporary

Review_, whose views are broadly liberal as a rule, and

whose acquaintance with Russian affairs seems to be specially

intimate, inclines to justify the measure on this practical

ground, or, rather, to accept it as approved by this result.

When the make-up of the Third Duma had become known he wrote,

in the _Contemporary Review_ of December, 1907, as

follows:

"M. Stolypin’s electoral law has been criticised severely.

And, to be frank, one must admit that from the point of view

of men who advocate universal manhood suffrage it is a mere

mockery. For it suspended the right of election in some

places, arbitrarily lessened the number of representatives in

certain provinces, created groups of electors, and authorised

Government officials to decide how they should be formed; in a

word, it is a means of manipulating the elections for the

avowed purpose of having a certain stamp of men returned and

another type of men eliminated. To say that the Chamber which

has resulted from these expedients is not the elect of the

nation is, of course, a truism. It is not, and was not, meant

to be this. … The data respecting the intellectual and social

status of the newly elected are still very defective and

untrustworthy. But so far as they go, they show that among the

men who are about to rescue Russia from ruin there are:—

Members of the nobility 157

Priests 51

Merchants 22

Peasants 77

Petty tradesmen 6

Working-men 15

Honorary burghers 8

Ex-officers 20

Officials 56

Zemstvo workers 27

Employees of municipalities 23

Marshals of nobility 36

Cantonal elders and secretaries 21

Men who have been educated in high schools 167

Men who have been educated in intermediate schools 82

Men who have been educated in primary schools 61

Members educated at home 23

Between the ages of 25-30 19

Between the ages of 30-40 81

Between the ages of 40-50 87

Between the ages of 50-00 47

Between the ages of 60-70 13

Between the ages of 70-80 l

Members of the Second Duma 59

Members of the First Duma 7

Members of the Council of the Empire 3

A month later the same writer said:

"The Third Duma is already a month old, and has as yet done no

work, has not even organised itself. Festina lente is

evidently its maxim, with the accent on the second word.

Debates there have been not a few, but they were as the noise

of sounding brass and tinkling cymbals. The first discussion

took place on the motion to thank the Tsar for the October

Manifesto, which created the Legislative Chamber. A great

majority of the deputies—including the Constitutional

Democrats, who are adjusting themselves to their

environment—were in favour of expressing their gratitude, but

they could not agree how to call the institution for which

they felt grateful. Some wanted to name it a Constitution,

others ‘a renovated order of things.’ If it is a Constitution,

then there is no Autocrat, the Octobrists argued, and

consequently that title of the Emperor must be dropped. ‘If we

are bent on thanking the Tsar,’ replied the Conservatives,

‘let us do it with a good grace. Whatever name we may give to

the present _régime_, the title of the ruler has

undergone no change. He was an Autocrat when he ascended the

throne, and he is an Autocrat to day. Proofs? They are as

plentiful as blackberries.’ …

"But the Constitutionalists—and among them the Octobrists

favoured by M. Stolypin—insisted. ‘By the Manifesto,’ they

argued, ‘the Tsar limited his authority and curtailed his

prerogatives. Thus it is no longer in his power to issue laws

without the approval of the Duma; neither can he abrogate any

of the Organic Statutes.’ ‘You are mistaken,’ answered the

Monarchists. ‘Have the Organic Statutes not been already

altered? Has the "immutable" electoral franchise not been

changed?’ … But the Octobrists stood their ground, and the

address was voted with a flaw in the Tsar’s title. That was

the work of one whole day and part of a night—an unlucky

day—the 13th November Russian style. In this way the Duma

offered the Sovereign a pot of honey mingled with wormwood.

The Premier was upset, the Tsar offended, and the Monarchists

indignant. ‘This, then,’ the Monarchists exclaimed, ‘is M.

Stolypin’s Duma, the areopagus which is to prescribe remedies

for the Russian nation now at death’s door?’

"Three days later came the Premier in a _quos ego_ mood.

And he was at his best. Ever since his first appearance as a

public orator, M. Stolypin has kept the high place he then

won. His eloquence, like his character, is manly, and his

utterance impressive. His look, his accents, his gestures,

betoken sincerity, and his manner is warm with the heat of

subdued enthusiasm. On this historic day he simply electrified

the House, captivated his adversaries, and extorted applause

from his bitter enemies. And yet he was battling with the

Duma, swimming against the current. He spoke of the Autocratic

power and of the Autocratic Sovereign, and had the

satisfaction of being interrupted by enthusiastic cheers. …

{577}

"Happily M. Stolypin is a man of steadfast purpose rather than

brilliant intellect, for his moral qualities may stand him in

better stead, during the revolutionary crisis than would rare

mental gifts. At bottom his temper is Liberal rather than

Conservative, and mainly for that reason he would seem to have

been chosen to be sexton of the old epoch and harbinger of the

new. …

"No fair-minded man can doubt the sincerity of M. Stolypin’s

Liberalism. It has withstood the test of time and the pressure

of unfavourable circumstance. His faith in Liberal specifics

is so firm that he declines to diagnose any diseases that call

for more drastic remedies. … M. Stolypin is at present the

only influential politician in Russia who is working

efficaciously for the Liberal cause. He is systematically

removing hindrances to Constitutionalism which are most

formidable at the outset. …

"But the greatest service which any Minister could render a

cause was performed by M. Stolypin for Liberalism at a time

when it depended on him either to lay the groundwork for a

Constitutional fabric or to establish firm Monarchical

government. And for that service he deserves, and may yet

receive, a public monument from Democratic Russia. He advised

the Tsar to summon the Third Duma soon after the Second, and

to issue no laws in the meanwhile. That was really the turning

point in the history of Russia’s Constitution, the _magnum

opus_ of M. Stolypin’s political life. And he followed it

up with a step more extraordinary and decisive still. He

himself had recourse to the Autocratic power which it is the

tendency of his policy to annihilate, and he used it for the

purpose of destroying Autocracy. That surely was a _coup de

maître_ which entitled the Minister to the undying

gratitude of all Liberal Russia. But not a Liberal uttered a

word of thanks. This deadly blow was struck at the Autocracy

in the following way:

"The Electoral Law opened the portals of the Duma chiefly to

Democrats and other irreconcilable enemies of the Monarchy,

and so long as it remained in force, no Duma acceptable to the

Government was possible. Yet it could not be abrogated. For,

together with the Organic Statutes, it had been declared part

of the unchangeable Constitution. The Tsar’s hands, therefore,

were tied, his word was pledged, and the result was a

deadlock. Autocratic power could not be wielded anew without

effecting a perilous _coup d'état_. Well, the Premier

advised the Crown to seize once more the sword of the

Autocracy, and with it to hew off the branch on which the

Autocrat was sitting. That was the true significance of the

measure against which the enemies of the Autocracy still cry

out. For the object directly aimed at and immediately attained

by this _coup d'état_ was the creation of the Octobrist

Party, whose first work in the Duma was to declare that the

Autocracy had gone forever."

_E. J. Dillon,

Foreign Affairs

(Contemporary Renew, January, 1908)._

RUSSIA: A. D. 1907 (November).

Treaty with Great Britain, France, Germany, and Norway,

guaranteeing the Integrity of Norway.

See (in this Volume)

EUROPE: A. D. 1907-1908.

RUSSIA: A. D. 1907-1909.

Action in Persia during the Constitutional Revolution.

See (in this Volume)

PERSIA.

RUSSIA: A. D. 1908.

Evasion of the Conscription.

See (in this Volume)

WAR, THE REVOLT AGAINST: A. D. 1908.

RUSSIA: A. D. 1908.

North Sea and Baltic Agreements.

See (in this Volume)

EUROPE: A. D. 1908.

RUSSIA: A. D. 1908.

Proxy Parliamentary Vote given to Women of Property.

See (in this Volume)

ELECTIVE FRANCHISE: WOMAN SUFFRAGE.

RUSSIA: A. D. 1908.

Policy of Prussia in her Polish Provinces dictated by

her relations to Russia.

See (in this Volume)

GERMANY: A. D. 1908 (JANUARY).

RUSSIA: A. D. 1908 (September).

Withdrawal from Intervention in Macedonia.

See (in this Volume)

TURKEY: A. D. 1908 (JULY-DECEMBER).

RUSSIA: A. D. 1908-1909.

Attitude toward the Austrian Annexation of Bosnia

and Herzegovina.

Was the Government coerced by German Threats?

See (in this Volume)

EUROPE: A. D. 1908-1909 (OCTOBER-MARCH).

RUSSIA: A. D. 1908-1909.

Exercise of Disputed Authority in Northern Manchuria.

The Kharbin question.

See (in this Volume)

CHINA: A. D. 1909 (MAY).

RUSSIA: A. D. 1908-1909.

Measures for the Destruction of the Constitutional Autonomy

of Finland.

See (in this Volume)

RUSSIA: A. D. 1908-1909.

RUSSIA: A. D. 1909.

Oppressions continued.

Executions, Imprisonment, Exile, Torture, Persecution.

On the 1st of August, 1909, a letter was addressed to the

British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs by one hundred

and eighty men of distinction in Great Britain,—Members of

Parliament, Peers, Bishops and other clergymen, University

professors, authors, editors,—asking the Government to exert

such influence as might be possible with that of Russia, to

induce a relaxation of the system of repression still

maintained in that unhappy country, and to ameliorate the

dreadful barbarities which go with imprisonment there. "We

know," said these memorialists, "how slow has been our own

progress in the past, and how many points in our present

condition are open to independent criticism. We are conscious

of the difficulties that attend all reforms, and we desire

that no feeling of impatience should cause us to withhold our

sympathy from every sincere attempt to promote good government

among a friendly people.

"It is in no spirit of ungenerous remonstrance that we are

constrained to observe that for four years a system of

repression has been maintained in Russia, which has not

relaxed its severity though the evidences of any organized

revolutionary movement have dwindled and disappeared. There

has recently been an announcement of some relaxation in

particular districts, but the greater portion of the Empire

remains, in time of peace, under some form of martial law. The

number of capital sentences on civilians for the period

between October, 1905, and December, 1908, has reached 4,002,

and the number of executions was officially stated to be

2,118. These sentences were passed, moreover, not by ordinary

civil process, but by exceptional military Courts. The number

of persons in exile in Siberia and Northern Russia, mostly

punished without trial by administrative process, under a

system of exile, which involves much physical suffering and

privation, was officially reckoned in October last at 74,000.

{578}

"The number of persons exiled without trial under

administrative decree cannot be realized without a serious

protest, but the evidence which has reached us through the

Press, from trustworthy witnesses, and above all from the

reports of the debates in the Duma, has persuaded us that the

sufferings of those who remain in prison justify, nay,

require, a stronger remonstrance. Over 180,000 persons—a total

which has more than doubled since 1905—criminals and political

offenders, are crowded together in prisons built to hold

107,000. In most of these prisons epidemic diseases, and

especially typhus, are prevalent; the sick and the whole lie

together—their fetters even in cases of fever are not removed.

In some prisons the warders systematically beat and maltreat

the sick and the whole alike. There is also evidence of more

deliberate tortures, employed to punish the defiant or to

extract confession from the suspect.

"Such excesses would move our indignation were all the victims

ordinary criminals. We desire to base our protest on the

ground of simple humanity; but it is none the less important

to remember that many of these prisoners, if guilty at all,

are suffering for acts or words which in any constitutional

country would be lawful, or even praiseworthy.

"Our object in addressing you is to draw your attention to

these facts and to place on record the impression which we

have formed of them. That no direct intervention is possible

we fully realize, nor do we wish to enlarge the area of

international controversy. But there are probably means by

which a friendly Government may exert an influence to

ameliorate the lot of those who are suffering under the evils

which we have described. The infliction of such wrongs upon

Russians and the indignation which they excite among

ourselves, are relevant and important factors in our mutual

relations, of which the two Governments should be fully

informed."

Later and more specific facts, illustrative of the arbitrary

and barbarous oppression under which the Russian people are

still suffering, were given in _The Outlook_ of October

9, 1909, from which the following is taken:

"In the first seven months of 1909 military courts sentenced

841 persons to death in Russia and up to the 1st of August 381

of the persons so sentenced had been hanged or shot. Nearly

all were civil or political offenders, who, in a

constitutional country, would have been tried with proper

legal forms and guarantees in the regular civil tribunals. In

these same seven months the publishers of 109 periodicals in

Russia were fined in the aggregate sum of 54,425 rubles for

publishing news or expressing opinions obnoxious to the

Government, and in addition to these pecuniary punishments

whole editions of papers and magazines were seized and

destroyed, printing offices were closed, editors were arrested

and employees were exiled—all by administrative process. In

the month of June, 1909, three newspapers were suppressed

altogether, and in August, 1909, the St. Petersburg journal

Reitch (Speech), the organ of the Constitutional Democrats,

was fined 500 rubles for printing a signed article entitled

‘Suicide in the Army,’ which was based wholly on reports of

the Ministry of War.

"On the 28th of May, 1909, Mr. Selden, a St. Petersburg

publisher, was sentenced to six months’ imprisonment in a

fortress for publishing one of Count Tolstoy’s books, and on

the 17th of August, 1909, the Count’s private secretary, Mr.

N. N. Gusef, was exiled by administrative process to the

province of Perm for distributing the venerable author’s

brochure entitled ‘Thou Shalt Do No Murder.’ In July, 1909,

Mr. W. Bogoras, author of Volume eleven of the Memoirs of the

American Museum of Natural History (one of the Volumes

containing the scientific results of the Jessup North Pacific

Expedition), was sentenced to two months' imprisonment for

describing the beating of citizens of Tver by dragoons in

1905, a thing that he had personally witnessed. …

"In August, 1909, the ‘Authors’ and Scientists’ Mutual Benefit

Society,’ a benevolent organization which had been in

existence for eighteen years, which had eight hundred members,

and which included most of the writers and scholars of Russia,

was suppressed by order of Premier Stolypin, for the

ostensible reason that it had given pecuniary aid to an

indigent author named Vitashefski—a man of advanced age who

had once, twenty years earlier, been sent to Siberia for

political crime. It is believed, however, that the real reason

for the suppression of the Society is the fact that most of

its members are liberals. The existing Government is extremely

intolerant toward social organizations that take an

independent or critical attitude toward the reactionary policy

now in force. On the 21st of July, 1909, the severest form of

martial law, the so-called ‘law of extraordinary defense,’ was

proclaimed in St. Petersburg for the seventh consecutive time.

The city has been under some form of martial law ever since

the assassination of Alexander II. in 1881. Almost the only

encouraging feature of the present situation in Russia is the

fact that the members of the Duma are still allowed to talk,

and the newspapers are still permitted to publish verbatim

reports of the debates. The lower house of the so-called

Parliament has no independent power, and no real control even

over the finances of the Empire; but it can criticise,

interpellate the Czar’s Ministers, and promote to some extent

the political education of the people.

"Three years ago Premier Stolypin defined his policy as

‘progressive reform, with the restoration of order.’ He has

partly restored order, by hanging, imprisoning, or exiling to

Siberia a large part of the disorderly population; but his

reforms have ‘progressed’ as the land-crab is popularly

supposed to walk—backward. Whether he is wholly to blame for

the reactionary policy that he is enforcing, or whether he

acts more or less under compulsion, we shall not know,

perhaps, until he retires from office and follows the example

of General Kuropatkin and General Linevitch by writing his

memoirs."

On the trial, in May, of M. Selden, for publishing and

distributing Count Tolstoi’s pamphlets, "Thou shalt not Kill,"

"A Letter to Liberals," "Christianity and Patriotism," the

venerable writer addressed a note to the court, challenging

the prosecution of himself, instead of the publisher. "As

these pamphlets," he wrote, "were written by me and published

by one of my friends, not only with my consent but at my

desire, M. Selden taking a purely passive part in the affair,

all the measures which are being taken against M. Selden

should logically and in equity be directed against me,

especially because I have repeatedly declared, and now declare

again, that I consider it my duty to my conscience to

disseminate, so far as lies in my power, the pamphlets in

question as well as my other works, and shall continue doing

so as long as I am able. I feel constrained to inform you of

this, and ask you to take whatever measures may devolve from

my present statement."

{579}

But the magistrate did not venture to institute proceedings

against the principal in the offense, and the Government took

no notice of the challenge.

RUSSIA: A. D. 1909.

Revived Censorship of the Press.

Its Stupidity.

Gains for Free Speech notwithstanding.

"At the present time, the liberties granted less than four

years ago are mutilated. The censor is busy once more. The

Russian journalist is again compelled to practice the arts of

half-meaning, insinuation, and innuendo, which made his

predecessors of a generation ago marvels of subtle expression.

But that is only when a writer would say everything he wants

to say. Undoubtedly, the range of the permissible has grown

immensely since the early days of even Nicholas II. To write

of labor wars, of conspiracies, of constitutional liberties,

Russian newspapers need no longer confine themselves to

telegraphic reports of foreign strikes, conspiracies, and

constitutions. They need only print what the radicals in the

Duma utter. Not even the full Duma’s reports may be privileged

at present, but, after all, the Russian censor is a stupid

fellow. The censorship, like the autocracy in general, is

inefficient, spasmodic, allowing to-day what it prohibited

yesterday, or even allowing in one column what it strikes out

from another. St. Petersburg and Moscow in 1890 had eleven

daily papers, and twenty weeklies. In 1900 the number had

risen to twenty-four dailies and thirty-three weeklies. In all

Russia there were then 287 periodical publications. In August,

1905, the number had risen to 1,630, of which St. Petersburg

alone had 534. There were fifty daily papers at St. Petersburg

and twenty-five at Moscow in those short days of freedom, when

the pent-up speech of ages burst out in Russia. This, of

course, was inflation. Periodicals were born and died with the

rising and setting of the sun. The numerical strength of the

press must be far smaller now. But much that was gained for

freedom of speech in those stormy days has not been lost."

_New York Evening Post,

March 23, 1909._

RUSSIA: A. D. 1909 (January-July).

Dark Secrets of the Russian Police and Spy System brought

to Light.

The first in a series of startling disclosures of the dark

secrets of the Russian espionage and police system was made in

January, 1909, when it came to public knowledge that the head

and front of the Revolutionary Socialists of the Empire, one

Azeff by name, had been discovered by his associates to be a

secret agent of the police; had been tried and condemned by a

tribunal of their party, at Paris, and had escaped into some

hiding place, with avenging emissaries in pursuit, to take his

life. A little later it appeared that a former Director of the

Police in the Department of the Russian Ministry of the

Interior, M. Lopukhin, had been arrested for treason, on the

charge of having betrayed Azeff to the Revolutionists, by

making known to them the double part that the latter played,

as a so-called _agent provocateur_, drawing them into

criminal plots of which he kept the police informed.

The preliminary trial of Lopukhin occurred in April, and it

was stated in the indictment then published that Azeff had

penetrated into the very centre of the Social Revolutionary

machinations, and that part of his great services to the

Secret Police were rendered during the period that M. Lopukhin

occupied the post of Director of the Police Department in the

Ministry of the Interior—_i.e._, from May, 1902, to

March, 1905. It was affirmed that M. Lopukhin not only knew of

the existence and activity of Azeff, but met the latter more

than once both at his (M. Lopukhin's) house and at one of the

conspiratorial headquarters in St. Petersburg. The indictment

paid a warm tribute to Azeff’s ability in so long maintaining

his connexion with the police without awakening the suspicions

of the Social Revolutionaries as to his true character. It was

eventually remarked, however, that the plots in which Azeff

was concerned invariably failed, whereas many of the others

succeeded, and accusations of treachery began to be levelled

against him. In October, 1908, a commission of inquiry was

appointed by the Social Revolutionaries in Paris to inquire

into the charges brought against Azeff. Burtzeff, editor of a

revolutionary organ, stated before this tribunal that he had

seen M. Lopukhin, who had informed him of Azeff’s relations

with the Russian police.

M. Lopukhin, on his trial, admitted having given this

information to Burtzeff, but explained that it was in

consequence of what the latter had told him of the

revolutionist designs, including a pending plot against the

life of the Tsar. He then felt it his duty to unmask Azeff,

lest the murders which might otherwise have followed should

lie on his conscience, and when the revolutionaries came to

him for confirmation of what he had told Burtzeff he found it

impossible to retract his words. He was convicted, however, on

the 13th of May, and sentenced to five years of imprisonment

at hard labor, with the loss of civil rights. The sentence was

mitigated subsequently, and he was sent to exile at

Krasnoyarsk, Siberia, his family being allowed to accompany

him.

Prince Urussoff, whose bold speech in the First Duma on the

instigation of massacres is quoted from above (A. D. 1906), is

a brother-in-law of M. Lopukhin, and derived from him, no

doubt, the information on which he spoke.

In July, a new disclosure of the character of the Russian

secret service police was made, as revolting as that in the

Azeff case. A personage known as M. Harting, chief of that

Russian service in Paris, and so favorably regarded in the

French capital that he was about to be made an officer of the

Legion of Honor, was discovered to have been the leader of a

plot to assassinate the Tsar Alexander III. in 1890, during

that monarch’s visit to Paris; that he then bore the name of

Landesen; that he had escaped arrest and was condemned by

default to imprisonment for five years; that he subsequently,

under the new name, secured secret service employment in the

Russian police. All this was quickly proved to be fact by the

French Government, and officially announced.

{580}

RUSSIA: A. D. 1909 (April).

The Agrarian Law.

On the basis of the decree relative to the communes which is

partly described above (see A. D. 1906), a law was brought

into force by the Government in 1906, known as the law of

November 9, which supposedly was provisional and subject to

ultimate ratification by the Duma. Writing of it in the New

York _Evening Post_ of May 28, 1909, S. N. Harper says:

"This law of November 9 aims directly at the destruction of

the commune. Before this law a two-thirds vote of the commune

was necessary for the granting of the petition of a member to

divide out. Now a local police official, whom by the way

another project of reform abolishes as irresponsible and a

source of abuse, can override the vote of a commune and grant

the petition. A peasant who divides out receives that portion

which he is using if there has been no redistribution for

twenty-four years. If there has been a redistribution within

twenty-four years, he receives what he would receive on the

basis of a new redistribution—what this would be is again

decided by the official. As we saw, no equitable reckoning is

possible here.

"The peasant can sell this land which he receives from the

commune, for it is now his private property. In one province

which I visited this summer, in over one-half of the cases of

dividing out the peasant had sold his land immediately—usually

to the village ‘fist’—the prosperous village usurer and boss

who holds his neighbors in his fist."

The law was operative for more than two years before it

received the sanction of the Duma, in April, 1909. Of the

parliamentary enactment then given to it the above writer

says:

"The outcome of the debates was certain. It had been secured

by the change of the electoral law for the third Duma, whereby

the landed gentry had been given the predominant vote. … No

more important than the vote of this assembly is the attitude

of the country at large toward this law. The landed gentry are

naturally for this measure. The village system is a source of

danger to them. The law will establish ‘peasant’ landlords,

whose interests will be much the same as theirs. But the

peasants have shown quite plainly their hostile attitude

toward this law. Only those peasants who are economically

provided for and those who, for one reason or another, have

become mere hangers-on of the local police officials are in

favor of the law. It is these that have taken advantage of the

law, with the support of the local official. But they have

done so in spite of the protest of the other peasants, only

their economic position making it possible, and their friend

the official has not been able to prevent, therefore, the

other peasants from giving a violent character to their

protest. Those who have insisted on dividing out have in many

instances been burned out the next week."

RUSSIA: A. D. 1909 (April-July).

Advance of Russian Troops into Persia.

See (in this Volume)

PERSIA: A. D. 1908-1909.

RUSSIA: A. D. 1909 (May).

New Russo-Chinese Agreement, establishing Municipalities on

the Line of the Chinese Eastern Railway.

See (in this Volume)

CHINA: A. D. 1909 (MAY).

RUSSIA: A. D. 1909 (June).

"Dreadnought" building.

See (in this Volume)

WAR, THE PREPARATIONS FOR: NAVAL: RUSSIAN.

RUSSIA: A. D. 1909 (June).

Stringent Orthodoxy of the Tsar.

A Press despatch from St. Petersburg, June 4, 1909, reported:

"Premier Stolypin spoke in the Duma to-day in defence of the

government’s draft of a law dealing with the matter of

changing from one faith to another and against the

modifications removing all restrictions introduced in

committee. He said that the Emperor, as head of the Orthodox

Church, could not suffer backsliding from the orthodox to

non-Christian beliefs, and that if such amendments were

incorporated the bill would be vetoed. Continuing he defined

the relations between church and state. He conceded that the

church enjoyed full independence in matters of creed and

dogma, but insisted on state control. The speech was a

brilliant effort, but it fell upon cold ears, and brought out

no applause. The premier, for the first time in the history of

the third Duma, found himself fighting for a lost cause before

an adverse house."

RUSSIA: A. D. 1909 (October-November).

Differing Accounts of Political Conditions, of the work of

the Duma, and of the Disposition of the Government.

The last weeks of 1909 brought from observers in Russia quite

differing impressions and representations of the existing

political conditions. Late in October a St. Petersburg

correspondent of _The Evening Post_, New York, wrote:

"Stolypin has given Russia a packed Duma, the predominant

party in which is elected by 130,000 rural gentry, who were

unable to get many more than a dozen members into the first

two Dumas. As might have been expected, this Duma has done

nothing for Russia. Its Land law has not been accepted by the

peasantry, its Religions law remains a dead letter, because,

according to the premier, the Tsar refuses to sign it. There

will be a deficit of about one hundred million in the new

budget, and the country is faced by bankruptcy.

"But, to return to the Duma, it has been proved during the

last session that the people have no control over the purse,

thanks to a ‘rule’ made by Count Witte before the meeting of

the first Legislature. This ‘rule’ says that if the Duma and

the Council of Empire fail to agree on the budget, then the

figures of the former year’s budget remain in force. As the

Council of Empire (or Russian upper house) must always have a

reactionary and bureaucratic majority, the Duma has no control

of the national expenditure and never can have. This was

brought home very forcibly to the lower house during the last

session, when a humble suggestion which it made about

including a sum of 350 million rubles in the extraordinary

expenditure account was rejected by the Council of Empire,

which thus taught the Duma that it has no control over even

the most important loan operations. When the Duma (with the

strong approval of even such conservative papers as the

_Novoe Vremya_) refused to sanction the naval budget

until the notoriously corrupt Ministry of Marine—the ministry

accountable for Tsushima—had been reformed, the government

laughed at it, and got the necessary money over the deputies’

heads."

Two weeks later than the above another St. Petersburg

correspondent was writing to London:

"To judge from to-day’s proceedings the present session of the

Duma bids fair to surpass the most sanguine hopes. Having

disposed of the last of the Agrarian Bills and of the First

Offenders Act, the Duma began the debate on the Bill reforming

the local Courts. This measure represents the foundation of

all political reform in Russia.

{581}

"The Duma Committee, after 35 sittings, adopted a proposal

considerably extending the scope of the Government Bill

besides providing for the re-establishment of elective

justices of the peace, introduced in 1804, but repealed in

1889 in favour of the arbitrary jurisdiction of the Communal

Court and the Zemsky Natchalnik--both long ago discredited

institutions. Just as the Agrarian reforms are calculated to

promote the private ownership of land and respect for the

rights of property, so the reform of the local Courts will

inculcate respect for the law.

"The details of the Bill may possibly give rise to differences

with the Government and the Upper House, but its substantial

features will be doubtless retained in the ultimate form which

will receive the Imperial sanction."

The writer of this had communicated to his journal, a few days

previously, the following report of an interview with "a

leading member of the Government," and apparently gave credit

to the sentiment it expressed. Said the Minister interviewed:

"You ask me what are the Government’s intentions regarding

Poland. I can only repeat what I said before the Joint

Commission on the Polish Municipal Reform Bill, which is to be

laid before the Duma. We have decided to give Poland the full

benefits of local government consistent with the interests of

the Empire, but not autonomy. We cannot trust the Poles to

that extent. We shall introduce a Bill creating a separate

province of Holm, where the great majority of the population

is of Russian stock, and extend to it the system of mixed

Russian and Polish _Zemstvos_ to be introduced in the

south-western provinces.

"I am satisfied with the progress of agrarian reform. You have

seen from the speech of M. Krivoshein in the Duma that one

million peasant households (about 5,000,000 souls) have

already abandoned the communal system.

"The continuance of executions is, I know, a source of

criticism. You know that the Emperor has given orders that

death sentences should be confirmed only in the worst cases.

Unhappily, I know of no constitutional method for putting down

revolution. Russia is so vast. It has taken a long time to

bring all the guilty to trial. I am also criticized for the

arbitrary acts of our local authorities, but, I ask you, does

the Government derive any interest from these arbitrary acts?

"Political reforms? Yes, they have been delayed. But what, for

instance, is the good of hurrying through a Bill on the

liberty of the person until we have first reformed the local

Courts?

"You have heard and read the statements that the Octobrists

have quarrelled with the Government; you have also been told

that Russia is on the eve of a reaction. Believe neither. The

Octobrists are taking a more advanced position. That is as it

should be. It is better for the Duma and by no means

disagreeable to the Government."

RUSSIA: A. D. 1909 (December).

Assassination of the Chief of the Secret Police.

On the 22d of December Colonel Karpoff, Chief of the Secret

Police, was killed by an infernal machine at a suburban

lodging occupied by a certain Voskresensky, who is supposed to

be a revolutionary and a police spy like Azeff.

----------RUSSIA: End--------

RUSSO-CHINESE BANK.

See (in this Volume)

CHINA: A. D. 1901-1902.

RUTHERFORD, Professor Ernest.

See (in this Volume)

SCIENCE, RECENT: RADIUM; also

NOBEL PRIZES.

RYAN, Thomas F.:

Investing in a Concession in the Congo State.

See (in this Volume)

CONGO STATE: A. D. 1906-1909.

RYAN, Thomas F.:

Purchase of Controlling Stock of Equitable Life

Assurance Society.

See (in this Volume)

INSURANCE, LIFE.

RYAN, Thomas F.:

Sale of interests to Morgan & Co.

See (in this Volume)

FINANCE AND TRADE: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1909-1910.

S.

SADR AZAM, The.

See (in this Volume)

PERSIA: A. D. 1905-1907.

SAGASTA, Praxedes Mateo:

Prime Minister of Spain.

His Death.

See (in this Volume)

SPAIN: A. D. 1901-1904.

SAGE FOUNDATION, The:

For the Improvement of Social and Living Conditions

in the United States.

See (in this Volume)

SOCIAL BETTERMENT: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1907.

SAGE, Mrs. Russell:

Gift to Yale University.

See (in this Volume)

EDUCATION: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1910.

ST. GOTHARD RAILWAY:

Acquisition by the Swiss Government.

See (in this Volume)

RAILWAYS: SWITZERLAND.

ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI: A. D. 1900-1904.

The Unearthing of Thievery and Corruption by Attorney Folk.

Prosecutions, Confessions and Convictions.

See (in this Volume)

MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT.

ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI: A. D. 1904.

The Louisiana Purchase Exposition.

Except the World’s Columbian Exposition at Chicago, in 1893,

the most important of the industrial exhibitions that have

been organized in America was that of 1904, at St. Louis,

which commemorated the centennial of the Louisiana Purchase

from France. The Exposition was opened on the 30th of April

and closed December 1st. An estimated total of $44,500,000 was

expended upon it in structures and management, of which sum

about $22,000,000 was raised by the Exposition Company. The

remainder was the expenditure of governments, Federal, State

and Foreign, and of concessionaires. The total attendance,

from first to last, was 18,741,073. The receipts fell far

short of the expenditure, and subscribers to the undertaking

can have had no returns; but the public gain from it was very

great. About sixty foreign countries and colonies and nearly

every State and Territory of the Union were represented in the

exhibits.

{582}