lecture v-第6章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


legal　power。　The　right　of　initiating　reforms；　which　the　English
Parliament　began　to　exercise　under　the　Lancastrian　kings　remained
totally　unknown　in　France　as　well　as　in　Russia。　At　the　time　when
the　English　Parliament　were　replacing　petitions　by　bills；　the
French　Estates　continued　to　present　their　cahiers　de　doleances；
leaving　to　the　Government　the　right　of　taking　in　its　ordonnances
no　notice　whatever　of　their　demands。　The　same　was　also　the　case
in　Russia；　where　new　laws　were　directly　decreed　by　the　Czar　and
his　Douma　and　the　〃general　verdict　of　the　land〃　remained　for
years　and　years　inoperative。
　　　　If　the　Sobors　only　played　a　secondary　part　in　matters　of
legislation；　the　control　that　they　exercised　over　the　executive
machinery　of　the　State　was　even　less　efficacious。　I　cannot
mention　a　single　case；　in　which　royal　councillors　were　removed
and　new　persons　appointed　in　their　stead　at　the　express　desire　of
the　Sobor。　The　Moscovite　Government　was；　it　is　true；　in　no　way　a
Parliamentary　Government。　Nevertheless　the　fact　does　not　prove
that　the　Sobors　had　nothing　in　common　with　English　Parliaments　or
French　States…General。　We　must　not　forget　that　medieval　Europe
was；　as　a　rule；　ignorant　of　Parliamentary　Government；　and　that
Assemblies；　like　the　Mad　Parliament　of　Oxford　or　the
revolutionary　French　Estates　of　1355；　both　of　which　tried　to
establish　a　kind　of　cabinet；　were　but　exceptions。　Although　the
Sobor　had　no　right　to　impose　on　the　Czar　the　obligation　of
calling　certain　persons　to　his　counsels；　the　part　it　took　in　the
general　politics　of　the　country　was　a　large　one。　We　have　had
occasion　to　show　that　questions　of　war　and　peace　were　settled　by
its　advice。　Both　the　surrender　of　Asov　and　the　annexation　of
Little　Russia　took　place　in　compliance　with　its　desires。　And
though　the　Sobor　was　denied　the　right　of　choosing　the　Ministry；
it　had　a　much　higher　right；　that　of　choosing　the　Czars。　On　this
point　it　had　no　grounds　to　envy　either　the　English　Parliaments；
or　the　States…General　of　France。
　　　　So　long　as　the　new　dynasty　of　the　Romanovs　remained　faithful
to　the　engagements　entered　into　by　the　Czar　Michael；　that　is　to
say　during　the　first　part　of　the　seventeenth　century；　the　voting
subsidies　was　as　much　the　function　of　the　Russian　representative
Assembly　as　it　was　of　the　representative　Assemblies　of　England；
France；　Germany；　or　Spain。　During　the　greater　part　of　the　reign
of　the　first　Romanov　no　subsidy　was　levied；　no　benevolence
extorted　without　the　consent　of　the　Sobor。　This　scrupulous
observance　of　its　financial　authority　required　its　periodical
convocation　just　as　much　as　the　meeting　of　the　English
representatives　was　needed　many　years　before　the　introduction　of
triennial　and　septennial　parliaments。　Excepting　during　the　period
just　mentioned；　the　Sobors　were　summoned　at　irregular　periods　and
only　when　the　needs　of　the　Government　required　their　help。　Like
other　representative　Assemblies　they　were　convened　and　dissolved
by　the　sovereign；　and　had　no　right　to　assemble　according　to　their
own　will。
　　　　If　we　would　know　what　good　they　have　done　to　Russia　we　must
study　the　part　they　have　played　in　the　removal　of　public
grievances　and　the　reform　of　justice。　We　must　remember　that　more
than　once　they　opposed　the　oligarchical　Government　of　the　boyars；
the　local　despotism　of　provincial　Governors　or　voivodes；　and　the
bribery　and　exactions　of　the　bureaucracy　of　Moscow。　We　must
remember　how　often　they　were　the　champions　of　justice　and
equality　in　opposing　the　system　of　judicial　immunities；　the
extravagant　donations　of　crown　lands；　and　the　exemption　from
taxation　of　the　nobility　and　clergy。　We　shall　then　have　no
difficulty　in　acknowledging　that　their　influence　was　truly
beneficial。　On　several　occasions　they　had　the　honour　of
participating　in　large　administrative　and　judicial　reforms；　such
as　the　codification　of　the　law　and　the　abolition　of　the　abnormal
custom　by　which　offices　in　the　army　were　held；　not　by　men　of
ability　and　talent；　but　by　those　of　aristocratic　birth。　Foreign
politics　were　more　than　once　treated　by　the　Sobors　with
discernment　and　practical　good　sense。　Their　patriotic　and
religious　feelings　did　not　keep　them　from　recognising　the　danger
of　a　new　war　and　the　necessity　of　relinquishing　a　conquest　which
had　been　easily　made。　On　the　other　hand　their　natural　dislike　of
new　taxes　did　not　prevent　them　from　stretching　out　a　helping　hand
to　their　orthodox　brethren　in　their　endeavours　to　emancipate
themselves　from　the　religious　persecution　of　Catholic　Poland。
Though　they　opposed　on　one　occasion　the　annexation　of　Asov；
nevertheless　on　another　occasion　these　representatives　of　the
people　of　Great　Russia　openly　manifested　their　desire　for　union
with　Little　Russia；　notwithstanding　the　possibility　of　a　new　war
that　would　necessarily　be　followed　by　an　increase　in　taxation；　In
the　so…called　period　of　troubles　they　stood　forth　as　the
champions　of　the　national　idea　by　the　opposition　which　they　made
to　every　political　combination　which　might　have　resulted　in　the
submission　of　Russia　to　a　foreign　prince。　In　those　unhappy　days
when　so　many　provinces　were　occupied　by　Polish　and　Swedish
soldiers；　and　the　boyars　were　half　gained　over　to　the　interests
of　Vladislas；　the　son　of　the　Polish　king；　when　Novgorod　made　a
separate　peace　with　the　Swedes；　and　was　on　the　point　of
recognising　the　doubtful　rights　of　a　Swedish　pretender；　the
political　unity　of　Russia　found　champions　only　in　the　ranks　of
the　lower　orders　represented　at　the　Sobor。
　　　　The　history　of　these　old　Russian　Parliaments　presents
certainly　a　less　dramatic　interest　than　the　history　of　English
Parliaments　or　French　States…General。　Cases　of　conflict　between
the　different　orders　convened　to　the　National　Councils　occur　very
seldom。　We　read　of　no　vehement　invectives；　like　those　which　the
deputies　of　the　nobility　thundered　forth　against　the　third　estate
at　the　etats　generaux　of　1613。　We　hear　also　of　no　compacts　or
associations　between　estates；　like　those；　which　more　than　once
allowed　the　English　barons　and　burgesses　to　achieve　a　manifest
victory　over　the　king。　The　language　employed　by　Russian
representatives　in　speaking　to　their　sovereign　is　moderate；　and
sometimes　even　servile。　They　like　to　call　themselves　the　〃slaves
of　his　Majesty；〃　but；　in　so　doing；　they　never　forget　their
obligations　towards　their　electors；　to　open　the　eyes　of　the
Government　to　〃all　the　wrongs；　depredations；　and　oppressions；
committed　by　its　officers。〃　They　are　subjects；　conscious　of　their
duty　towards　sovereign　and　country；　ready　to　sacrifice　their　life
and　estates　for　the　defence　of　its　essential　interest；　they　are
not　slaves；　afraid　of　opening　their　mouths　or　of　offending　the
ear　of　the　monarch　by　a　truthful　description　of　their　wrongs。
Their　loyalty　towards　the　Czar　finds　a　parallel　in　that　which
they　entertain　towards　the　Greek　Church。　They　are　orthodox；　and；
therefore；　ready　to　shed。　their　blood　in　the　defence　of　their
creed；　simply　represented；　as　it　sometimes　is；　by　the　images　of
the　saints；　but　they　have　no　inclination　towards　clericalism；　and
no　objection　to　imposing　taxes　on　the　clergy　and　even　to
secularising　their　estates　for　the　good　of　the　country　and　the
advantage　of　the　military　class。　Illiterate　as　were　their
members；　it　is　not　surprising　that　the　Sobors　took　no　measure　to
increase　the　number　of　schools　and　educational　establishments。
They　are　probably　the　sole　representative　Assemblies　which　never
uttered　a　word　about　science　or　scholarship。　It　was　chiefly　due
to　their　ignorance　that　their　opinions　about　commercial
intercourse　with　foreign　countries　were　so　little　rational。　it　is
not　surprising　if　the　whole　policy　of　trade　reduced　itself；
according　to　their　understanding；　to　the　elimination　of　the
competition　of　the　Eastern　and　Western　merchants。
　　　　With　such　helpers　as　these　no　general　reform；　like　that　of
Peter　the　Great；　was　likely　to　be　accomplished。　It　may　be　easily
understood；　therefore；　why　this　greatest　of　Russian
revolutionists　never　tried　to　associate　the　Sobors　in　his　work。
The　reforms　at　which　he　aimed：　the　subversion　of　the　civil　and
military　organisation；　the　introduction　of　a　totally　new
provincial　administration；　copied　from　Swedish　originals；　of　a
standing　army；　like　those　of　the　French　and　German　autocrats；　the
opening　of　Russian　markets　to　the　competition　of　foreign
merchants；　the　establishment　of　technical　schools　and　such　like
innovations；　were　not　to　be　carried　out　by　〃the　decision　of　the
whole　land；〃　to　employ　the　consecrated　term　for　Russian　legal
enactments　during　the　period　directly　preceding　that　of　Peter　the
Great。　〃Enlightened　despostism〃　found　in　Russia　the　same
difficulty　in　going　hand　in　hand　with　the　old　Assemblies　of
estates；　as　it　did　in　Austria　at　the　time　of　Joseph　the　Second。
　　　　Fully　to　understand　the　reasons　which　prevented　the　Wither
development　of　the　Russian　national　councils；　we　must　also　bear
in　mind　that　the　period　in　which　Russia；　by　the　genius　of　Peter；
was　thrown　into　active　intercourse　with　European　powers；　was　far
from　being　the　golden　age　of　representative　Government。　When　the
Sobors　began　to　take　root　in　the　Russian　soil；　Parliaments　and
States…General　were　rapidly　advancing　to　a　state　of　complete
annihilation　or　temporary　suppression。　What　importance　can　we
attach　to　the　deliberations　of　the　English　Parliaments　under　the
Tudors；　or　even　under　the　Stuarts；　up　to　the　year　1640？　What
National　Assembly　can　we　mention　in　France　after　the　year　1613？
The　fall　of　representative　institutions；　which　we　notice　both　in
England　and　in　France；　was　a　common　fact　of　European　history。　The
German　Reichstag　and　the　Landstande　of　the　different　States　which
composed　the　Holy　Roman　Empire　had　fallen　into　the　same　state　of
political　insignificance　during　the　period　following　the　treaty
of　Munster。　The　same　fate　had　overtaken　the　Cortes　of　Castille
and　Aragon；　and　the　provincial　estates　of　Hungary　and　Bohemia。
All　over　Europe　monarchical　power　was　steadily　increasing；　and
autocracy　becoming　the　ruling　principle　of　the　day。　Was　it
likely；　therefore；　that　Peter；　who　declared　that　he　would
willingly　have　given　to　Richelieu　a　good　moiety　of　his　dominions
on　condition　of　being　taught　by　him　how　to　rule　the　remainder；
was　it　likely；　I　ask；　that　that　same　Peter　should　bring　home　from
his　long　voyages　in　the　West　any　particular　respect　for
representative　institutions？　It　is；　therefore；　easily　understood
why；　from　the　beginning　of　the　eighteenth　century；　the　Sobors；
without　being　abolished；　should　have　ceased　to　be　convened。
　　　　It　was　not　until　there　was　a　general　revival　of
representative　institutions　throughout　Europe　that　Russian
statesmen　were　found　once　more　occupied　with　the　question　of　the
Sobors。
　　　　Alexander　I；　to　judge　by　the　liberality　with　which　he　endowed
the　Poles　with　a　representative　assembly；　was；　at　least　in　the
first　part　of　his　reign；　not　directly　opposed　to　the　idea　of
re…calling　to　life　those　venerable　institutions　of　the　past。
Among　the　papers　of　his　most　intimate　Councillor；　Speransky；
there　has　been　found　the　project　of　a　constitution；　according　to
which　the　Council　of　State；　this　natural　heir　of　the　old　Russian
Douma；