The main provisions of the manifesto of October 17. The highest manifesto on the improvement of public order

On October 9, S. Yu Witte, Chairman of the Committee of Ministers, submitted a note to the Tsar with a program for the country’s exit from the revolutionary crisis. The main condition was the creation of a strong government, the proclamation of civil liberties, the transition to legislative representation with the provision of universal suffrage in the future. And since the other way out of the revolutionary situation was the establishment of a military dictatorship, which the tsar feared, Nicholas II signed a manifesto on October 17, 1905 "About improvement public order», which contained a promise to the people of the “unshakable” foundations of civil freedom on the basis of actual personal inviolability, freedom of conscience, speech, assembly and association.

“1) Grant the population the unshakable foundations of civil freedom on the basis of actual personal inviolability, freedom of conscience, speech, assembly and association.

• 2) Without stopping the intended elections in State Duma, now to attract to participation in the Duma, to the extent possible, corresponding to the brevity of the period remaining before the convocation of the Duma, those classes of the population that are now completely deprived of voting rights, thereby leaving the further development of the beginning of general suffrage to the newly established legislative order.
• 3) Establish as an unshakable rule that no law can take effect without the approval of the State Duma and that those elected by the people are provided with the opportunity to truly participate in monitoring the regularity of the actions of the authorities appointed by us.

We call on all the faithful sons of Russia to remember their duty to their Motherland, help put an end to the unheard-of unrest and strain all their strength to restore silence and peace in native land».

The manifesto marked the beginning of the folding parliamentarism in Russia. This was a new step towards transforming the feudal monarchy into a bourgeois one. According to the Manifesto, the State Duma was characterized by certain features of parliament. This is evidenced by the possibility of openly discussing government issues, sending various requests to the Council of Ministers, declaring no confidence in the government, etc.

According to the Manifesto of October 17, the State Duma was established as a legislative body, although tsarism tried to evade this principle. The Duma was supposed to have issues requiring legislation: state registration of income and expenses; state control report on the use of state registration; cases of alienation of property; cases concerning the construction of railways by the state; cases on the establishment of companies on shares and a number of other, less important cases. The State Duma had the right to query the government regarding illegal actions committed by ministers or chief executives. The Duma could not start a session on its own initiative, but was convened by decrees of the tsar.

December 11, 1905 The highest decree was issued to change the regulations on elections to the State Duma. While preserving the curiae system established during the elections to the Bulygin Duma, the law added agricultural, urban and peasant curiae to the previously existing curiae, and labor and somewhat expanded the composition of voters.

But also new law contained significant restrictions on a certain category of electors. For example, according to the workers' curia, only men over 25 years of age and working in enterprises (with at least 50 workers) were allowed to vote; Moreover, the work experience at this enterprise must have been at least 6 months. The law retained the ban on participation in elections for women, military personnel, and youth under 25 years of age, i.e. the elections were not general. They were not equal either. Thus, in the agricultural curia there was one elector per 2 thousand people, in the urban curia - per 4 thousand, in the peasant curia - per 30 thousand, in the workers' curia - per 90 thousand people. The government, which continued to hope that the peasantry would be the support of the autocracy, provided it with 45% of all seats in the Duma. The elections were not direct, but two-stage for the landowner and urban curia, three for the workers' and four-stage for the peasant curia. Members of the State Duma were elected for 5 years.

On October 19, 1905, a decree was published on measures aimed at strengthening unity in the activities of ministries and main departments. In accordance with the decree, the Council of Ministers was reorganized, which was now entrusted with the leadership and unification of the actions of the main heads of departments on issues of management and legislation.

The tsarist government, not relying only on the electoral system, on the eve of the opening of the first State Duma, published a new regulation on the State Council. According to the regulations of February 20, 1906, the State Council was actually transformed into a second chamber, standing above the State Duma. This was a violation of the Manifesto of October 17, 1905.

System higher authorities power and administration in the Russian Empire (February 1906 - February 1917) looked like this (Fig. 3):

Fig.3.

The State Chancellery and the Council of Ministers prepared the text Basic state laws , approved by Emperor Nicholas II on April 23, 1906. The Basic Laws formulated civil rights and freedoms (inviolability of home and property, movement, choice of profession, speech, press, meetings, creation of unions and associations, religion, etc.). In ch. 1 the formulation of the supreme power is given: “The Supreme Autocratic Power belongs to the All-Russian Emperor.” The power of administration also belonged to the emperor “in its entirety,” but the emperor exercised legislative power “in unity with the State Council and the State Duma,” and no new law could be adopted without their approval and come into force without the approval of the emperor. However, Art. 87 of the Basic Laws provided the opportunity for the emperor, on the recommendation of the Council of Ministers, to adopt decrees of a legislative nature in cases where there was such a need, and the session of the Duma and the Council was interrupted. But after the opening of the legislative session within two months, such a decree had to be submitted for approval by the Duma, otherwise it would automatically cease to be valid. The State Duma and the State Council did not discuss the issues of eliminating or reducing payments on public debts, loans to the Ministry of the Household, and government loans. The duration of the Duma was determined to be five years; by decree of the tsar it could be dissolved ahead of schedule, in which case elections and dates for convening the Duma of a new composition were set. The duration of the annual sessions and the timing of the break in the work of the Duma were determined by decrees of the emperor. IN Duma competence included: issues requiring the publication of laws and approval of states, discussion and approval of the budget, hearing reports from the state controller on budget execution, cases on the construction of state railways, and on the establishment of joint-stock companies. At the beginning of 1906 they published budget rules, according to which the budget could be executed even if the Duma refused to approve it, which sharply limited the budget rights of the Duma. Basic state laws gave the king the right to an absolute veto. However, the Duma could again return to discussing an issue rejected by the tsar, thereby putting pressure on him. The deputies had right of request to ministers, which gave the Duma the opportunity to publicly discuss the actions of the executive branch and demand answers from the government. Based on the results of these answers, the Duma passed judgments.

In general, the Fundamental Laws enshrined the principle of separation of powers, seeking to ensure a compromise between the monarchy and new social forces and close the way to anti-constitutional (revolutionary and conservative) tendencies. The radicals insisted on the abolition of the upper house, the creation of a government responsible to parliament, and denied the tsar's right to grant the constitution. Conservatives demanded that the authorities severely reduce constitutional rights; they saw in any reform movement the danger of revolution.

Height revolutions 1905-1907 persuaded the government of Nicholas II to accept in August 1905 the draft introduction legislative people's representation (“Bulyginskaya Duma”). But the narrowness of the rights of this body did not satisfy the revolutionaries. The unrest continued to spread. Here is what the great Russian writer A. I. Solzhenitsyn writes about the unrest that unfolded on the eve of the publication of the Manifesto on October 17:

“...The revelry only went further. Journalism was completely dissolute, and no one turned to the judiciary to apply the laws to it. One printing house began to go on strike - its young typesetters, mixed with some suspicious crowd, went to knock out the windows in the other printing houses - and they all stopped. Sometimes they killed or wounded a policeman or a gendarme... Until the post office went on strike, vile and vile letters came to the grand dukes. Then the post office went on strike, followed by the telegraph; for some reason, attorneys at law, high school students, bakers went on strike, and it spread from establishment to establishment. Even a theological academy! - and the Metropolitan, having appeared to reassure them, was not allowed inside by the students whistling and revolutionary songs. Some priests refused to read the Metropolitan's message of appeasement. Moscow did not pull out of strikes and street clashes throughout September and October. The strikers demanded that the factories have deputies who could not be fired, who could not be arrested, and that the deputies themselves could fire the administration. Self-proclaimed congresses were held, the deputies were chosen by themselves. (Strangely, local authorities did not act). Proclamations containing many promises were distributed. Street gatherings were already gathering, and the speakers were demanding not the Zemstvo members, not the Duma members, but only the overthrow of the autocracy and the constituent assembly. The order was not to shoot, but to disperse. Agent telegrams only reported about the murders of policemen, Cossacks, soldiers, unrest and disturbances. But the judicial authorities did not prosecute political criminals, judicial investigators did not discover the perpetrators, and all of them, including the prosecutors, sympathized with them.”

In October 1905, anarchy reached the point of an all-Russian political strike.

“The revolutionary railway union formed itself and began to force the entire mass of railway employees to go on strike. This went quickly for them; from October 7 to October 10, almost all roads leaving Moscow went on strike. They had a plan: to cause a general hunger strike and prevent the movement of troops if the government wanted to suppress. Students ordered shops to close. Taking advantage of the lack of information, the attackers spread a rumor throughout Moscow that the Emperor “refused and went abroad.” Immediately, Moscow was left without water, without electricity, and all pharmacies went on strike. In St. Petersburg, Nikolai gave all the troops of the garrison to Trepov, who warned that any disorder would be suppressed, and everything remained calm here. In the meantime, they decided to do a general strike throughout the country, terrible. Yes, there may be a lot of fairness in the work requirements, but no one wanted to wait until everything was decided gradually.”

Telegraph and telephone communications were interrupted everywhere. In these October days of 1905, most Russian people did not know what was happening in the neighboring city. The Tsar, who was in St. Petersburg, was almost unaware of the situation in Moscow. Participants in the general strike demanded a Constituent Assembly on the basis of a general-secret-direct-equal vote, the abolition of martial law and the immediate introduction (right in the midst of anarchy that threatened the very existence of Russia) of all possible freedoms.

Some strong figures, like St. Petersburg Governor-General Dmitry Trepov, stood for restoring order through decisive measures. But such people constituted a small minority at the top. Most prominent dignitaries, on the contrary, gravitated towards complete capitulation to the revolution. This pseudo-liberal movement, which then persuaded the Tsar to publish the Manifesto on October 17, was led by one known for its moral “Machiavellianism.” S. Yu. Witte. When in 1903 the “guardian” was promoted to the first role in the Russian government V. K. Plehve, Witte actually found himself in a state of honorable retirement. He ardently sought to return to the leading position among the ministers and planned to enter into a close alliance with the revolutionary liberals for this purpose.

Witte asked for a separate audience with Nicholas II and gradually began to instill in him the idea of ​​retreating before the revolutionary rapists. As A.I. Solzhenitsyn writes with irony:

“Witte began to come to Peterhof in the morning and left almost in the evening. One day he reported everything completely to Nikolai, another time together with Alix, and presented a note. Only an outstanding mind could help in this difficult situation, and here it was. He knew how to think somehow loftily, above the everyday tasks of a simple government - at the level of all human history or itself. scientific theory. And he spoke willingly, for a long time, with enthusiasm, to be listened to. He said that the progressive development of the human spirit is now manifesting itself in Russia, that every social organism has an inherent desire for freedom - and this is naturally manifested in the movement of Russian society towards civil rights. And so that this movement, now approaching an explosion, does not cause anarchy, it is necessary for the state to boldly and openly become the head of this movement. Freedom will soon triumph anyway, but it’s scary if, with the help of a revolution, socialist attempts, the destruction of family and religion, will be torn apart by foreign powers. But one can easily escape from all this if the slogan of government activity, like that of society, becomes the slogan of complete freedom - and immediately the government will gain support and introduce the movement within its borders. (And Witte personally undertook to firmly implement such a policy). The Deliberative Duma was proposed too late and no longer satisfies social ideals, which have moved into the realm of extreme ideas. We should not rely on the loyalty of the peasantry, or somehow single them out, but we must satisfy progressive social thought and move towards universal-equal-secret voting as the ideal of the future. And there is no need to be afraid of the word “constitution,” which means the division of legislative royal power with elected ones; we must prepare for this outcome. The main thing is to choose ministers who enjoy public respect. (And who used it more than Witte!) Yes, Witte did not hide: this would be a sharp turn in the politics of entire centuries of Russia. But in an exceptionally dangerous moment it is impossible to cling to tradition any longer. There is no choice: either the monarch becomes the head of the liberation movement or surrenders the country to be torn apart by spontaneity.”

These subtle, crafty persuasions led the indecisive king into complete confusion:

“With his arguments, Nikolai could not resist this inexorable logic, and the situation really suddenly seemed terribly ruined... But his heart resisted and did not want to immediately give up his power, and the traditions of centuries, and the peasantry. As if something was a little wrong - and there was no one else to consult with someone so smart.”

Since the unfortunate, tragic day of January 9, 1905, it was extremely difficult for the tsar to decide to use troops against the people.

“After Witte’s seductive convictions, without finding a solution in Alix, Nikolai consulted with someone for a day and another day, and languished, not finding and not seeing a solution from anywhere...

...It seemed that maybe Witte was exaggerating and that we could avoid a big decision altogether and make a simple small one. And Nikolai gave a telegram to Witte about this: to unite the actions of all ministers (hitherto scattered, since each of them reported to the Emperor) - and restore order on the railways and everywhere in general. And when a calm life begins, it will be natural to call on elected officials.

But it turned out to be Trepov’s program, and Witte, Trepov’s enemy, could not accept it. The next morning he sailed to Peterhof and again imagined that the path of suppression was theoretically possible, although it was unlikely to be successful, but it was not he, Witte, who was capable of carrying it out. In addition, for protection Russian roads there are not enough troops; on the contrary, they are all located beyond Baikal and are held back by roads. Witte has now brought his thoughts embodied in an all-submissive report, which the Sovereign only needs to approve and a new line will be chosen: to heal Russia by broadly granting freedoms, first and immediately - the press, meetings, unions, and then the political idea of ​​​​a prudent majority will gradually become clear and the legal order will be established accordingly , although during for long years, because the population will not soon develop civic skills.

Emperor Nicholas II. Portrait by I. Repin, 1896

We talked in the morning and talked some more in the evening. There was a lot of strangeness in what Witte proposed, but no one suggested and there was no one to ask anything else. So it was as if I had to agree. It was just scary to surrender into one person’s hands right away. Wouldn’t Witte want to take on as Minister of Internal Affairs a person of a different direction - Goremykina? No, Witte insisted, he should not be constrained independent choice employees, and – don’t be alarmed – even public figures.

No! Nikolai could not approve such a report. And then: something must come personally from the Emperor, some kind of manifesto. A manifesto of gift, which is announced in churches directly to the ears and hearts of the people yearning for these freedoms. For Nicholas, the whole point of concessions could only be in the form of such a manifesto: so that it came straight from the tsar - and towards the people's desires. Yes, that’s it, let Witte draw up a project and bring it tomorrow...

...And in the morning he rushed Uncle Nikolasha- bypassing strikes, on relays directly from near Tula, from his estate. Here's the arrival, and by the way! If we are going to appoint a firm hand, a dictator, then who is better? Since Nikolai was a squadron member in the Life Hussar Regiment, and Nikolasha was his regimental commander, Nikolasha remained a great military authority for him. And upon arrival, with a bang, Nikolasha even agreed to dictatorship. But then Witte came again, poured out his sweet admonitions - and Nikolai again softened, became confused, and Nikolasha was completely convinced, became a mountain for Witte and for freedoms and even said that he would shoot himself if Niki did not sign the freedoms. The fact is, Witte convinced them, that if an energetic military man suppresses sedition now, it will cost streams of blood, and the respite will bring only a temporary one. According to Witte’s program, the calm will be lasting. Witte only insisted on publishing his report - so that the Emperor would not take responsibility (or perhaps he wanted to appear better to society?), and it is difficult to put it in a manifesto. However, he was also preparing a manifesto: they drafted it on the ship, now the employees there were finalizing it at the pier.”

(A.I. Solzhenitsyn. August of the Fourteenth)

Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaevich (“Uncle Nikolasha”)

The main provisions of the Manifesto of October 17, 1905

“They sent for the manifesto.

It contained wonderful words: “The good of the Russian Sovereign is inseparable from the good of the people: and the people’s sorrow is His sorrow.” This was exactly how Nikolai truly understood and would constantly like to express, but there were no skillful intermediaries. He sincerely wondered why the evil unrest did not subside, why mutual peace and patience would not be established, under which all peaceful people, both in the countryside and in the city, would live well, and many loyal officials, and many sympathetic dignitaries, civil and military, as well as the Imperial Court and the Imperial House, all the great princes and princesses - and no one would have to sacrifice anything or change their lifestyle. (Especially, Mom always insisted that no one touch the issue of cabinet and appanage lands that these pigs want to take away according to the programs of different parties).

And the manifesto also contained: all the freedoms that Witte insisted on, and the expansion of voters in the already announced Duma, and as a future ideal - universal suffrage, as well as the impotence in future of every law not approved by the State Duma.

Of course, the Tsar understood that the Russian people were not yet ready for representation, they were still ignorant and uneducated, and meanwhile the intelligentsia was filled with revolutionary ideas. But there will be a concession - not to the street, not to the revolution, but to the moderate state elements, for whom this is being built.

And it wasn’t exactly the same constitution that came out of it if it came from the royal heart and was given by his kind gesture?

Everyone present agreed - but out of caution, Nikolai did not sign and left it at home to pray and think.

And consult with Alix. And consult with someone else, with Goremykin, with others. Two more draft manifestos were drawn up. However, Witte warned when leaving that every change should be agreed with him, otherwise he would not undertake to implement it. On Sunday night they sent old Fredericks to St. Petersburg to see Witte. He did not accept a single amendment, saw in this a lack of confidence in himself and already refused the post of first minister.

But during these days no one suggested a decisively different way out: except for the faithful Trepov, everyone, led by Nikolasha, was convinced of the need to grant freedoms and limit the tsarist power.

The decision was terrible, Nikolai was aware of this. The same torment and bewilderment as with the Japanese world: did it work out well? or bad? After all, he changed the limits of royal power, inviolably received from his ancestors. It was like a coup against oneself. He felt like he was losing his crown. But the consolation was that this was God’s will, that Russia would at least emerge from the unbearable chaotic state in which it had been for a year. That with this Manifesto the Sovereign pacifies his country, strengthens the moderates against all extremes.

And it became good for him to grant him freedom.

This happened on Monday, October 17, and just on the 17th anniversary of the train accident, where the dynasty almost died (they were also commemorated every year). Attended the celebration of the Combined Guards Battalion. They served a prayer service. Then we sat and waited for Witte to arrive. Nikolasha was somehow too cheerful. And he also convinced that all the troops were in Manchuria anyway, there was nothing to establish a dictatorship with. And Nikolai’s head became completely heavy and his thoughts were confused, as if in a cloud.

After praying and crossing himself, he signed. And immediately, my state of mind improved, as always when a decision has already been made and experienced. Yes, now, after the Manifesto, everything should have calmed down quickly.”

(A.I. Solzhenitsyn. August of the Fourteenth)

The immediate meaning of the Manifesto of October 17, 1905

The manifesto of October 17, 1905 did not have at all the consequences that the resourceful Witte promised. He did not calm down the revolution, but rather inflamed it even more. A. I. Solzhenitsyn writes:

“And the next morning was sunny, joyful, a good omen. Already on this day, Nikolai expected the first waves of popular rejoicing and gratitude. But to his amazement, everything turned out wrong. Those who rejoiced did not thank the emperor, but tore his portraits publicly, vilified his remaining power, the insignificance of concessions and demanded instead of the State Duma - Constituent Assembly. In St. Petersburg there was no bloodshed only thanks to Trepov, he banned all processions in general (the press insisted on dismissing him), but in Moscow and in all other cities they were - with red banners, the triumph of victory, ridicule of the tsar, but not gratitude. And when a day later, in response, the alarmed believing people, led by no one, rose up in all the cities with icons, portraits of the Emperor, national flags, an anthem, then there was not gratitude or rejoicing in them, but anxiety. In vain did the Synod try to stop the second movement, that the king was powerful and could handle it himself - the two movements, red and tricolor, in all cities could not help but come into conflict, civil strife among the crowds, and the frightened authorities were not there. And it is amazing with what unanimity and immediately this happened in all the cities of Russia and Siberia: the people were outraged by the mocking rampage of the revolutionaries, and since many of them were Jews, the anger of the alarmed people fell in some places in Jewish pogroms. (In England, of course, they wrote, as always, that these riots were organized by the police). The crowd in some places became so furious that they set fire to government buildings where the revolutionaries had locked themselves, and killed anyone who came out. Now, a few days later, Nikolai received many cordial telegrams from everywhere with a clear indication that they wanted to preserve the autocracy. His loneliness was broken through by popular support - but why not in the previous days, why were they silent before, good people, when both the active Nikolasha and the devoted Goremykin agreed that they had to give in? Autocracy! - Should we assume that he is no longer there? Or did it remain in the highest sense?

In the highest sense, it could not be shaken; without it there is no Russia.

Here it also happened that, apart from the Manifesto and the Witte Report, not a single document was drawn up; they didn’t have time: all the old laws seemed to be abolished at once, but not a single new law, not a single new rule was drawn up. But the merciful God had to help, Nikolai felt His support in himself, and this did not allow him to lose heart.

Witte turned to the newspapers and through the newspapers to society for help: give him a few weeks of respite, and he would organize a government. But society demanded that calm begin with the abolition of enhanced security and martial law, with the dismissal of Trepov, with the abolition death penalty for robberies, arson and murder, with the withdrawal of troops and Cossacks from the capital (they saw in the troops main reason riots) and the repeal of the last restrictive laws on the press, so that the press would no longer be responsible for any expression at all. And within a few days Witte was at a loss, not finding support: no matter how he called, none of the Zemstvo members and liberals went to his government to lead freedom. And although he replaced half of the ministers and 34 governors, fired Trepov and many police officials, he did not achieve peace, but only worse ruin. It's strange that he's so experienced clever man I made a mistake in my calculations. Likewise, the new government, like all the previous ones, was afraid to act and waited for orders. Now Nikolasha was very disappointed in Witte.

Only now, belatedly, it became clear that the Moscow strike had already turned to calm on the eve of the Manifesto: the water supply system, horse trams, and slaughterhouses began working again, university students surrendered, the city duma no longer demanded a republic, the Kazan, Yaroslavl, and Nizhny Novgorod roads had already decided to go back to work, - oh, if only I knew this in those days! - everything was already beginning to calm down, and there was no need for any Manifesto, - but the Tsar poured it on like kerosene to the fire, and again all of Moscow began to seethe, and even Governor General Durnovo took off his hat at the Marseillaise and welcomed the red flags, some paramedic came to the funeral almost a hundred thousand, speeches were made not to believe the Manifesto and overthrow the Tsar, brand new revolvers were distributed from the university (not all ships ran aground, the sea border is long, you can’t guard it all). And in St. Petersburg, students from the Technological Institute threw a bomb at the Semyonovites.

Oh, who then would have jumped up and said that it was already calming down?!!... Or why, really, didn’t listen to Wilhelm in the summer, didn’t rush to elect and assemble this deliberative Duma? - It would be even better to stop everything! And now it only glowed more intensely. They rushed to liberate the prisons with red flags. National flags were torn down everywhere. The former strikers demanded pay for the days of the strike - and in the meantime new strikes were announced. The press reached unbridled impudence - any perversions about power, lies and dirt, and all censorship completely disappeared, and revolutionary newspapers were already openly appearing. Gatherings in higher educational institutions stretched out over weeks. Traffic on the railways stopped again, and Siberia was completely interrupted, to the east of Omsk there was complete anarchy, in Irkutsk there was a republic, and from Vladivostok a revolt of reserves flared up, not being sent to their homeland. There was indignation in one of the grenadier regiments in Moscow, and soldier unrest in Voronezh and Kyiv. For two days Kronstadt was in the grip of an over-drunk sailor crowd (and even the details could not be found out, the telephone did not work, only the windows of the Peterhof Palace trembled from Kronstadt shots), and the naval crew went on a rampage in St. Petersburg. In the south and east of Russia, armed gangs roamed and took the lead in the destruction of estates. Urban agitators incited peasants to rob the landowners - and there was no one to restrain them. Peasant riots spread from one area to another. The revolutionary parties openly discussed how to conduct propaganda among the troops and raise an armed uprising. The self-proclaimed council of workers' deputies in the capital seized printing houses and demanded money. Poland was all in a rebellious movement, the Baltic provinces and Finland were in a genuine uprising (bridges were blown up, entire counties were captured), the governor-general fled on a battleship (Nicholas yielded to the Finns in everything, signed another manifesto). Happened here sea ​​riot in Sevastopol. Back in the Navy! (It’s amazing how these scoundrels didn’t care at all about the honor of Russia and how they didn’t remember their oath!) And then an all-Russian postal and telegraph strike broke out - neither traffic nor messages became even worse. Sometimes from Tsarskoe Selo they spoke to St. Petersburg only by wireless telegraph. It was impossible to find out how Russia fell in one month! - her whole life, activities, household, finances, not to mention external relations. Ah, if only the authorities performed their duty honestly and without fear of anything! But selfless people were not visible at the posts.

And Witte, who never led the “natural movement of progress,” now proposed shooting and hanging, but he himself did not have the strength.

Yes, bloodshed was still coming, only worse. And it’s painful and scary to think that all the dead and all the wounded are our own people. It’s a shame for Russia that it is forced to go through such a crisis in front of the whole world, and what it has been brought to in a short time.”

(A.I. Solzhenitsyn. August of the Fourteenth)

Manifesto of October 17, 1905 and the Duma monarchy

The general principles set out in the Manifesto of October 17, 1905 were soon developed into a number of specific legal acts. These included:

– Decree to the Senate December 11, 1905, which greatly expanded suffrage in the cities, primarily for the local intelligentsia.

– « Establishment of the State Duma» dated February 20, 1906, which determined the rights of this new legislative body, as well as the procedure for its dissolution and interruption of classes.

– « Establishment of the State Council" that converted it before legislative establishment of the upper house of the Duma.

- summing up all these reforms " Basic laws» April 23, 1906 – actually Constitution, which did not directly receive such a name only out of conservative caution.

- numerous laws that strengthened and expanded civil rights and freedoms.

This legislation, based on the principles of the Manifesto of October 17, replaced the former Russian autocracy with the system of the Duma monarchy, which existed before February Revolution 1917 of the year. New government system had many shortcomings. The four State Dumas elected since 1906 did not become democratic bodies. They were dominated by an oligarchy of rich strata and party leaders, which showed itself not better than that one the tsarist bureaucracy, with which she selflessly was at enmity.

The Manifesto of October 17, 1905 was inspired by the ideas of abstract educational Western parliamentarism, alien to Russian traditions. Attempts to introduce them into Russian political practice suffered, in fact, a severe failure. The Duma was unable to prevent the catastrophic revolution of 1917 and even deliberately contributed to its beginning. The state-zemstvo system was much more in line with Russian conditions and Russian history, and not the abstract “freedom” that was proclaimed by the Manifesto.

October 30 (new time) 1905 during revolutionary events 1905-1907 Russian Emperor Nicholas II published the so-called "October 17 Manifesto" (“On improving public order”).

The peak of the thunderous events of the First Russian Revolution occurred in October 1905. More than 2 million workers went on strike across the country. Landowners' estates were burning everywhere. Even the army, which the tsarist government always relied on as a force capable of suppressing any rebellion, no longer seemed as reliable as before (the uprising on the battleship Potemkin, which shook the whole of Odessa, was only the “first sign”).

The reasons lay in serious economic problems caused by the abolition of serfdom in 1861, which did not solve a lot of problems (land shortage of peasants, their economic dependence on both their former landowners and the state) and the inability of the conservative monarchical system to adequately respond to the difficulties that arose. And the economic crisis that swept across Europe and hit Russia hardest, as Lenin put it, which was “the weakest link in the chain of imperialist states,” also had its impact. How can one not recall the three signs of a revolutionary situation, well known to all Soviet schoolchildren, formulated by the same Lenin (remember: “the upper classes cannot” and “the lower classes do not want”?).

Defeat in the “small victorious”, in the words of the Minister of Internal Affairs V.K. Plehve, Russo-Japanese War 1904-1905, as well as the events of “Bloody Sunday” (January 9, 1905) were the last straw.

However, Plehve himself did not live to see either the defeat of Russia in the war against Japan, or the Manifesto in question, since he was killed by a militant of the Socialist Revolutionary Party E. Sozonov on July 15 (28), 1904 (interestingly, the main organizer of Plehve’s murder was an agent secret police and at the same time a member of the Central Committee of the Socialist Revolutionary Party E. F. Azef).

Portrait of V. K. Plehve by I. E. Repin (1902):

Initially, the government tried to pacify the people with various decrees and legislative acts (for example, the promise of creating a legislative advisory representative body, which went down in history under the name “Bulyginskaya Duma”, after the name of the then head of the Ministry of Internal Affairs), as well as by force.

Of course, the situation when the government either promised its subjects some freedom and civil rights, then canceled its decisions, only contributed to the tension in the situation. When popular uprisings reached their peak, the emperor was forced to order the immediate development of the text of a manifesto that would announce the transition of the government system from an absolute to a constitutional monarchy.

Nicholas II in 1905 (portrait by G. M. Manizer):

In the "Manifesto of October 17", prepared by the head of the Council of Ministers S.Yu.Witte , who considered constitutional concessions the only way preservation of autocracy, it was promised to grant the people “the unshakable foundations of civil freedom.”

S. Yu. Witte on a sketch by I. E. Repin:

The manifesto proclaimed some democratic innovations, such as personal integrity, freedom of speech, assembly, the creation of public institutions and others. In addition, the scope of suffrage was expanded and the first Russian parliament was created. The State Duma , it was recognized by the legislature.

Opening of the State Duma:

Liberal circles of Russian society greeted the proposed transformations with enthusiasm.
The manifesto was in the nature of an interim solution. He managed to somewhat extinguish the fire of the revolution, but the tsar’s reluctance to give up power and his sole right to dissolve the Duma created a contradictory effect that did not fully satisfy the aspirations of the country’s population. And the armed uprising in Moscow in December 1905, organized by the Social Revolutionaries and Social Democrats, direct to that confirmation.

"Barricades on Presnya" (artist I. A. Vladimirov):

And the electoral law, according to which the first parliament in Russia was elected, was far from democratic (and after the dissolution of the Second State Duma on June 3, 1907, which was followed by a completely illegitimate new (“Stolypin”) electoral law, there were no general and equal elections I have to say it).

The painting, painted by Ilya Efimovich Repin in 1907, was a response to the manifesto of Nicholas II of October 17, 1905, “On the improvement of public order,” published during the days of the revolutionary upsurge in the country.
I. E. Repin wrote: “The painting depicts a procession of the liberation movement of Russian progressive society... mainly students, female students, professors and workers with red flags, enthusiastic; with the singing of revolutionary songs...lifted onto the shoulders of the amnestied and a crowd of thousands moving across the square big city in the ecstasy of general rejoicing."

Among those depicted in the picture are democratically minded philologist M. Prakhov (left), actress L. Yavorskaya (with a bouquet), critic V.V. Stasov (center).

In the fight against the revolution of 1905–1907, the Russian autocracy, along with repressive methods, used a policy of maneuvering and concessions, which led to significant transformations of the state system. The Manifesto of October 17, 1905 is one of the most important political documents that reflected crucial moment in the history of our state. The October 17 Manifesto is the first and important step towards constitutional evolution, the creation of a rule of law state, which is why understanding the conditions for adoption and the consequences of the document in question is not only of the most important academic, but also of applied, practical interest. In the fall of 1905, the Russian Empire was swept by a general political strike.

It is generally accepted that the strike began on September 19, 1905, when Moscow printers, putting forward economic demands, went on strike. Soon people of other professions began to join the strike, the strike began to “stride” through the cities, and the demands began to have a clearly political character. The authorities turned out to be unprepared and unable to resist the growing anarchy, which manifested itself in looting and violence. The ruling circles recognized the need for reforms, but no one understood how they should be expressed. V.P. Dmitrienko notes that during the period under review, three reform positions were formed at the top.

Adherents of the first spoke out for the adoption of a liberal constitution, the second - for the creation of an advisory body, and the third - that order and pacification should be ensured by the sovereign with the help of dictatorial techniques. During this difficult period for our country, S.Yu. appears on the political scene. Witte, who returned triumphant from America, where he signed the Portsmouth Peace Treaty. Success in the negotiations increased the influence of the politician; it seemed that he was able to solve any issue, including the strike problem. It is worth noting that earlier S.Yu. Witte was not a supporter of elected bodies; he believed that representatives and autocracy are incompatible things.

However, at the end of 1904 S.Yu. Witte began to express ideas about creating a united representative office that would take a consistent course. In his letter to K.P. Witte wrote to Pobedonostsev: “the public must be made to feel that there is a government that knows what it wants and has the will and fist to force everyone to act according to their wishes. It must lead the public, and not obey the crowd, especially the maddened one." In 1905, after the start of the strike movement, the position of S.Yu. Witte is changing, now he expresses ideas about creating an elected representative body that will have legislative rights. Subsequently, the ideas were put into material form, in the form of a special note, which was presented to Nicholas II on October 9, 1905. S.Yu. Witte proposed granting civil rights, convening a people's representative office and endowing it with legislative power, creating a council of ministers, and also proposed solving the labor issue by rationing the working day and state insurance. Witte believed that only by making such concessions could the autocracy be saved and the revolutionary uprisings nullified.

It was assumed that the reforms would make it possible to achieve a tactical victory over the revolutionary forces, after which it would be possible to adjust the political course within the framework of the interests of the autocracy. Now Witte’s task becomes to convey his ideas to the emperor. S.Yu. Witte wrote to Nicholas II: “The idea of ​​civil freedom will triumph, if not through reform, then through revolution... “The Russian revolt, senseless and merciless,” will turn everything into dust. The mind refuses to imagine how Russia will emerge from this unprecedented test; the horrors of the Russian revolt may surpass everything that happened in history... Attempts to implement the ideals of theoretical socialism - they will be unsuccessful, but they will undoubtedly - will destroy the family, the expression of religious worship, property, all the foundations of law.” Arguments and arguments of S.Yu. Witte greatly influenced the emperor. On October 13, 1905, Witte was appointed chairman of the Council of Ministers of the Russian Empire. However, Count S.Yu. Witte does not accept the new position; instead, he issues an ultimatum to Nicholas II, in which he states that he will accept the post only if the reform program he outlined is approved.

The program was supposed to be considered at a meeting of persons “at the discretion of the sovereign.” Discussions of the program took place in the following days and ended on October 17, 1905 with the adoption of the manifesto “On the Improvement of Public Order.” The Manifesto granted the subjects of the Russian Empire the unshakable foundations of civil freedom on the basis of actual personal inviolability, freedom of conscience, personality, and speech. In addition, the document was supposed to expand the circle of voters and give the Duma a legislative character. The Manifesto of October 17, 1905 was revolutionary for its time and largely determined the further vector of development of our state. In the circles of the democratic intelligentsia and the public, the Manifesto of October 17 caused constitutional illusions. It is worth noting that no one was ready to accept this kind of document, which is why the Manifesto of October 17 brought confusion and ambivalent feelings of perception in society. Thus, revolutionary parties accepted the Manifesto of October 17 as a manifestation of the weakness of the ruling regime and decided to continue the fight against tsarism, the broad masses received the document with joy, they thought that the strike movement and protests would come to an end.

The right liberal parties were completely satisfied with the Manifesto, and the Cadets perceived the document as the basis for the transition to constitutional monarchy. S.Yu. Witte, as head of the cabinet of ministers, had to solve a number of very difficult tasks, namely: legislatively implement the provisions of the Manifesto of October 17, nullify revolutionary sentiments in society and create an effective administrative apparatus. The situation was complicated by the financial crisis and the unwillingness of government structures to resist popular uprisings. S.Yu. At the stage of consideration of the Manifesto of October 17, Witte showed determination in his intentions. However, from the first days of his premiership, he realized that quick stabilization of the situation is impossible. October 20, 1905 S.Yu. Witte, in a government message, announces that the implementation of the reforms proclaimed by the Manifesto of October 17 will take time; the country continues to live according to the old laws.

Thus, the head of the cabinet of ministers makes it clear to the public that he intends to preserve the autocratic system and not follow the path of constitutional reforms in Russia, which he previously expressed many times before the adoption of the Manifesto on October 17. Assessing the influence of the Manifesto of October 17, 1905 on stopping revolutionary uprisings, it is worth noting that the effect was achieved only in moderate liberal circles, which had not previously been noted for radicalism. The liberal bourgeoisie went over to the side of the counter-revolution. E.D Chermensky wrote: “the leaders of the bourgeois parties that were being formed at that time D.N. Shipov, M.A. Stakhovich, A.I. Guchkov, Prince E.N. Trubetskoy accepted without hesitation Witte’s offer to enter into negotiations on the formation of the first “Constitutional” cabinet.” During the above negotiations, it was understood that the liberals largely shared the program of S.Yu. Witte, which was designed to strengthen the autocracy.

However, they refused to openly support the program, because... they were afraid to fall in the eyes of the masses. It was generally not possible to extinguish the revolutionary flame; the revolution reached its climax in November-December 1905. Rallies and strikes, demonstrations, destruction of noble estates, terror and violence against government officials, uprisings in the army and navy - all these phenomena of unrest only continued to spread, plunging the empire into darkness. S.Yu. Witte was never able to establish cooperation between the authorities and representatives of liberal circles, despite the fact that many of them were offered ministerial positions. The fact is that the consent to accept the position was subject to additional conditions and reservations, which were impossible to accept. The head of the cabinet of ministers, after the adoption of the Manifesto on October 17, expected recognition and honor, but he received none of this. S.Yu. Witte underestimated the inertial forces of the revolution and did not assume that the adoption of the manifesto would only worsen the situation. Despite the fact that the autocracy made radical concessions, the desired result in the fight against the revolutionary movement in the country was not achieved.

To stabilize the situation in the country, it was necessary to make powerful, strong-willed decisions, which, after some hesitation, were made. Troops began to be deployed to suppress the protests. In December 1905, Moscow was swept by a new wave of protests, which resulted in full-scale fighting, there were street battles between leftist and government troops. These events had a strong impression on his contemporaries, and the views of S.Yu. changed dramatically. Witte. Now he did not want to talk with the opposition, he wanted to hang and shoot them. The change in the government's course influenced the development of the revolution and the future fate of our country.

References 1. Witte S.Yu. Selected memories. M., 1991. 720 p. 2. Dmitrienko V.P. History of Russia XX century. M.: AST, 1999. 608 p. 3. Chermensky E.D. History of the USSR. The period of imperialism. M.: Education, 1974. 446 p.