by Dmitry Gubin
[REGNUM] One hundred twenty years ago, on May 10 (April 27, Old Style), 1906, the First State Duma began its work by order of Emperor Nicholas II. This first attempt at popular representation in the Russian Empire proved, if not entirely disastrous, then at least quite instructive.
The educated public had long awaited the emergence of a representative body in Russia. Since 1861, the country had been undergoing reforms that affected literally all of the sovereign's subjects. The abolition of serfdom, a new system of zemstvo self-government, the introduction of jury trials, which allowed wealthy peasants to participate, and universal military service (instead of conscription)—all of this changed the face of the empire.
Even freedom of movement within the country was guaranteed for the majority of the population. But the new system proved incomplete.
FROZEN EMPIRE
In the Romanov "fiefdom," which amounted to one-sixth of the world's landmass, there was no representative body or legal parties (except for the Grand Duchy of Finland). Conservatives and liberals limited themselves to club meetings, while leftists engaged in illegal activities, escalating into terror against the Narodnaya Volya (People's Will) and, from 1901, the Socialist Revolutionary Party.
On the other hand, censorship (necessary to maintain public peace) remained essentially non-centralized and was under the jurisdiction of provincial officials.
During the reigns of Alexander II and Alexander III, many issues accumulated that had long required a solution: land, labor, and national (especially Polish and Jewish).
The number of literate people in the empire grew: from less than 10% of men who could read (the proportion among women was even lower) in the mid-19th century to about 30% of literate “males” by the end of the century.
The raznochintsy environment—which emerged as a phenomenon during the era of the Great Reforms and developed in the 1870s–90s—was reinforced by writers and publicists in the opinion that the bureaucracy was incapable of solving the country’s problems on its own, without taking into account the demands of all classes.
Those "with broad views" (often not radicals, but well-intentioned ones) quoted Count Leo Tolstoy, who wrote in an 1893 article that "for the greatest and most important changes in the life of humanity to occur," neither workers' unions nor, especially, revolutions with barricades are needed, but only a "change in public opinion." And this is only possible if each individual "says what they really think"—and can convey this opinion to the authorities.
But in St. Petersburg, they obviously believed that the zemstvo’s participation in the establishment of schools and hospitals, which was granted by Alexander the Liberator, was quite sufficient.
The Chief Prosecutor of the Synod, Konstantin Pobedonostsev (who exerted ideological influence on Alexander III and Nicholas II at the beginning of his reign), believed that parliamentarism on the model of Europe and the North American States not only was not suitable for the Russian Empire, but also, in principle, could not be a true representation of the people.
Pobedonostsev wrote in his article “The Great Lie of Our Time” (1884):
“Elections in no way express the will of the voters.
The people's representatives are not at all constrained by the views and opinions of the voters, but are guided by their own arbitrary discretion or calculation, taking into account the tactics of the opposing party.
The ministers are in reality autocratic; and they rather force Parliament than Parliament rules them."
But, the Chief Prosecutor believed, European cabinets of ministers do not act according to the will of their nations, but as instruments of competing powerful figures (lobby groups, as they would say today), who order policy.
It is understandable why Nicholas II, in his first public speech—an address to the Zemstvo deputations in the Winter Palace in January 1895—emphasized:
"Recently, voices have been heard in some zemstvo assemblies of people carried away by senseless dreams of zemstvo representatives' participation in internal governance. Let everyone know that I, devoting all my efforts to the good of the people, will protect the principles of autocracy."
THE LOGIC OF EVOLUTION
Economically, the empire was on the rise. From 1895 to 1897, Finance Minister Count Sergei Witte implemented an effective monetary reform, establishing the ruble on the gold standard (making the empire more attractive to foreign investment). At the same time, protectionist measures supported Russian manufacturers, and railways made the country more connected.
According to the American economist and historian Paul Gregory, from the early 1880s to the early 1910s, the gross national product in Russia grew by 3.2%, while in the German Empire during the same period it grew by 2.9% (the Romanov Empire was second only to the United States with its 3.5%).
Industrial and financial circles increasingly demanded political representation for themselves—and, ideally, “responsible government” (responsible to parliament, and therefore to lobby groups).
Moderate leftists believed that only a parliamentary tribune could protect and expand workers' rights. True, by the turn of the century, workers' real wages had risen: while in the 1870s a worker in the capital earned around 15 rubles a month, by 1900 it was no less than 21 rubles.
But, on the other hand, up to 70% of wages went toward housing and food. And benefits like shorter working hours, disability insurance, hospitals, and workers' dormitories were a matter of employers' goodwill, not guaranteed by law.
The logic of economic and labor relations development led the Russian Empire along the same path as the German and Austro-Hungarian empires—toward a functioning representative government (where even social democrats sit) under a strong monarch.
But external events accelerated the process of transformation, and the development of Russian parliamentarism suffered a false start.
TWO FORCE MAJEURE CIRCUMSTANCES
The first "black swan"—an unpredictable event with serious consequences—was the Russo-Japanese War, or more precisely, its course and conclusion. The campaign was n't as catastrophic as the democratic press portrayed, but the media impact of the failures at Mukden and Tsushima was decidedly negative: the "tsarist regime" lost to a less-than-powerful adversary.
The Treaty of Portsmouth, in fact a successful diplomatic compromise with less than ideal starting points, seemed to cement this defeat.
The head of the Committee of Ministers, and then the Council of Ministers, Sergei Witte, was given the nickname “Count Polusakhalinsky” (the count’s financial policies were no longer mentioned).
The second “black swan” occurred on January 9, 1905, when a workers’ demonstration in St. Petersburg was shot at.
Objective problems, coupled with government mistakes and the support of radicals from external enemies, led to the first Russian revolution.
The terror of the Socialist Revolutionaries and anarchists, and the Social Democratic "expropriations" became commonplace incidents. Meanwhile, up to 9,000 people died in terrorist attacks and clashes between 1905 and 1907.
Strikes at factories and burning of estates, pogroms in the Pale of Settlement and massacres in Transcaucasia became a daily backdrop.
Harsh measures taken by Interior Minister and then Prime Minister Pyotr Stolypin curbed the wave of violence at a relatively low cost. In 1906–1907, during the operation of military courts, 683 terrorists and riot organizers were executed (out of 1,102 death sentences).
But this was an urgent intervention. The problems that had triggered the revolution required serious "therapy."
After the All-Russian political strike put forward political demands, Nicholas II, at Witte's instigation, decided on a compromise.
In a manifesto issued on October 17 (30), 1905, the Emperor announced that subjects were granted freedom of speech, conscience, and assembly with unions, and that the State Duma should be convened to pass laws.
How the Duma would be elected remained a mystery, which was clarified by the end of the year.
HOW AND WHO WAS ELECTED
Elections to the first Russian parliament were neither direct nor equal. Voters were divided into curiae and censuses, meaning people were divided by their means and background.
Urban voters in the capitals and 24 large cities enjoyed the right to cast ballots in two stages.
Voters elected electors, and electors from all curias, meeting in the provincial capital, elected members of the Duma. To vote, one had to meet strict criteria at least a year before the election.
A landowner had to have from 100 to 650 dessiatines
| … a former Russian unit of area equal to 2.7 acres… |
A city deputy had to be a property owner, a commercial or industrial establishment owner, a tenant, or an employee. This, incidentally, was a significant advance. Before city council elections, tenants were not allowed, and potential city council members (deputies) were required to present real estate worth at least 1,000 rubles.
A peasant without a home could not stand for election, and a worker could only stand for election from an enterprise that employed at least 50 male workers.
There were also categories of the population that were deprived of voting rights: foreign nationals, persons under 25 years of age, women, students, active military personnel, and “wandering aliens.”
As well as governors, vice-governors, mayors and their assistants, police officers, employees at their place of service (in a neighboring or remote province they could vote).
By the opening of the Duma sessions, 480 out of 524 deputies had been elected.
The seats in the meeting hall of the Tauride Palace in St. Petersburg were distributed as follows: Constitutional Democrats (Cadets) - 176, the Union of October 17 - 16, the left-wing Labor Group - 98, the RSDLP (Mensheviks) - 18, and 63 - autonomists-foreigners.
WHAT WENT WRONG
Excluding the national outskirts, the voter (with all the restrictions) gave his vote to the liberals (the slightly more left-wing Cadets and the slightly more right-wing Octobrists) and the socialists – the Trudoviks
| …a democratic socialist party.. |
It even resembled the English Parliament (as it had become in the 1930s), with Conservatives, Liberals, and the Labour Party. But that's only at first glance.
The transition from autocracy to a virtually constitutional monarchy (but without a constitution) was painful, and most importantly, too rapid. The politicians who "leapfrogged" from salons and secret circles to the halls of the Tauride Palace were unprepared. The voters, who were required to navigate the complexities of ideologies and programs (peasants were particularly challenged), were unprepared. The authorities were also unprepared.
The government did not develop or submit any bills, and the majority of deputies were so opposed to the government (the Cadets were as much enemies of the autocracy as the RSDLP) that they were unable to engage in any dialogue with the prime minister and his subordinates.
"The Duma expressed the contemporary public mood in its most extreme forms. In times of social unrest, the most revolutionary parties always rise to the top," stated Octobrist deputy and history professor Vladimir Gerye. Lawyer Vladimir Kuzmin-Karavayev put it more succinctly: "The members of the Duma are unanimous in everything concerning denial."
In practice, however, things sometimes got a bit silly. Academician Maxim Kovalevsky, a member of the Democratic Reform Group, regularly took the floor to explain to his colleagues what the bills were about and what certain terms meant.
Pickpocketing occurred in the meeting room and behind the scenes: some “creators of democratic reforms” took wallets from others.
But most importantly, it was impossible to establish a cooperative relationship between the Duma and the Prime Minister. No agreement could be reached with either the moderate liberal Witte, or, even less so, with the conservative Ivan Goremykin who replaced him.
At some point, Nicholas II's patience ran out, and on July 9 (22), 1906, he dissolved the Duma. The deputies, arriving for their next session, found the text of the Tsar's decree posted on the closed doors of the Tauride Palace.
The same situation then repeated itself with the next convocation, which lasted less than six months, from February to June 1907. Then, Prime Minister Stolypin received information from police agents about anti-government agitation among soldiers and the involvement of several RSDLP deputies.
It was only on the third attempt, in November 1907, that Russian parliamentarism finally began to function. It lasted less than ten years—first, World War I (accompanied by domestic political tensions), and then the two catastrophes of 1917 exposed the fragility of the hastily erected edifice.