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！
liberty。 Such was the case of those so…called 〃silver…men from
the oldest times；〃 viz。； starinnii serebrenniki； who during the
sixteenth century were already deprived of the right of free
removal from no other cause but the want of money； so that the
only condition on which they could withdraw from the manor on
which they were was that of finding some other landlord willing
to pay the money they owed； and thereby acquiring the right to
remove them to his own manor。
So long as the Russian power was geographically limited to
the possession of the central provinces in the immediate
neighbourhood of Moscow； and so long as the shores of the Volga
and Dnieper suffered from almost periodical invasions of the
Tartars； the Russian peasant who might wish to leave a manor
could not easily have procured the land he required； but when the
conquests of Ivan III and Ivan the Terrible had reduced to naught
the power of the Tartars； and had extended the Russian
possessions both to the East and to the South； the peasants were
seized with a spirit of migration； and legislation was required
to put a stop to the economic insecurity created by their
continual withdrawal from the manors of Inner Russia to the
Southern and Eastern steppes。 It is； therefore； easy to
understand why laws to prevent the possibility of a return of
peasant migration were first passed； at least on a general scale；
at this period。 It is no doubt true that； even at the end of the
fifteenth century； to certain monasteries were granted； among
other privileges； that of being free from the liability of having
their peasants removed to the estates of other landlords。 A
charter of the year 1478 recognises such a privilege as belonging
to the monks of the monastery of Troitzko…Sergievsk； which is；
according to popular belief； one of the most sacred places in
Russia。 The financial interests of the State also contributed
greatly to the change。 The fact that the taxpayer was tied to the
soil rendered the collection of taxes both speedier and more
exact。 These two causes sufficiently explain why； by the end of
the sixteenth century； the removal of peasants from manor to
manor had become very rare。
The system of land endowments in favour of the higher clergy
and monasteries； and also of persons belonging to the knightly
class； had increased to such an extent that； according to modern
calculation； two…thirds of the cultivated area was already the
property either of ecclesiastics or of secular grandees。 It is
therefore easy to understand why； during the sixteenth century；
the migratory state of the Russian agricultural population came
to be considered as a real danger to the State by the higher
classes of Russian society。 The most powerful of the nobles and
gentry did their best to retain the peasants on their lands。 Some
went even farther； and； by alleviating the burdens of
villein…service； and securing a more efficient protection for
them from administrative oppression； induced the peasants who
inhabited the lands of smaller squires to leave their old homes
and settle on their manors。 It was in order to protect the small
landowners from this sort of oppression that Boris Goudonov； the
all…powerful ruler of Russia in the reign of Theodor Ivanovitch；
promulgated a law； according to which every one was authorised to
insist on the return of a peasant who left his abode； and that
during the five years next following his departure。 This law was
promulgated in 1597。 As no mention is made in it of the right
previously enjoyed by the peasants of removing from one manor to
another on St。 George's Day； this law of 1597 has been considered
by historians as the direct cause of the introduction of the
so…called 〃bondage to the soil〃 （krepostnoie pravo）。 Such was
certainly not its object。 The right of migration on the Day of
St。 George was openly acknowledged by the laws of 1601 and 1602。
The bondage of the peasant to the soil became an established fact
only in the year 1648； when the new code of law； the so…called
Oulogienie （chap。 xi）； refused to any one the right to receive on
his lands the peasant who should run away from a manor； and
abolished that limit of time beyond which the landlord lost the
right to reclaim the peasant who had removed from his ancient
dwelling。
The number of serfs rapidly increased during the second half
of the seventeenth and the eighteenth centuries； owing to the
prodigality with which the Czars and Emperors endowed the members
of the official class with lands； in disregard often of their
previous occupation by free village communities； the members of
which were forced to become the serfs of the persons who received
the grant。 It is in this way that Catherine II； for instance；
during the thirty…four years of her reign； increased the number
of serfs by 800；000 new ones； and that Paul I； in a period of
four years； added 600；000 to the number； which was already
enormous。
Before the reign of Catherine； serfdom was almost unknown in
Little Russia； where it had been abolished by Bogdan Chmelnitzky；
soon after the separation of Little Russia from Poland； and in
the Ukraine （the modern Government of Kharkov）； where it had
never before existed。 In 1788 she revoked the right hitherto
enjoyed by the peasants of these two provinces to remove from one
manor to another。 The same right of free removal was abolished a
few years later in the 〃Land of the Don Kossacks〃 and among the
peasants of the Southern Governments； called New Russia
（Novorossia）。
But if the second part of the eighteenth century saw the
territorial extension of serfdom over almost all the Empire； it
was also the period in which first began the movement which led
to emancipation。 From France came the first appeals for the
liberation of the serfs。 In 1766 the Society of Political
Economists founded in Petersburg on the model of the agricultural
societies of France was asked by the impress to answer the
question： 〃Whether the State would be benefited by the serf
becoming the free owner of his land？〃 Marmontel and Voltaire
considered it to be their duty to express opinions in favour of a
partial abolition of serfdom。 Marmontel thought that the time was
come to supersede villein…service by a sort of hereditary
copyhold。 Voltaire went a step farther； inviting the impress to
liberate immediately the serfs on the Church lands。 As to the
rest； free contract alone ought to settle the question of their
emancipation。 Another Frenchman much less known； the legist
Bearde de l'Abaye； gave it as his opinion that the Government
should maintain a strict neutrality towards the question of
serfdom。 It ought to be abolished only by free contract between
landlords and serfs； the former endowing the latter with small
parcels of land。 In this way the serf would become a private
owner； so that in case he should rent any land from the squire；
the squire would be able to seize the peasant's plot in case of
non…payment of his rent。 Diderot was the only Frenchman who
acknowledged the necessity of an immediate abolition of personal
servitude； but in his letters to the Empress he does not say a
single word about the necessity for securing to the liberated
serf at least a small portion of the manorial land。
Although Catherine II was willing to be advised by the
Encyclopedists as to the way in which serfdom might be abolished；
she took effectual means to prevent the expression of Russian
public opinion on the same subject。 A memorial presented to the
Petersburg Society of Political Economists by a young Russian
author called Pelenev was not allowed to appear in print； for no
other reason than that it contained a criticism on the existing
system of serfdom。（1*） The author of the memorial did not demand
the immediate abolition of this old wrong； he only wanted to see
it replaced by a sort of perpetual copyhold。 The Government was
more severe towards another Russian writer； Radischev； who was
the first to advocate not only the personal liberty of the serf；
but also his endowment with land。 The work of Radischev （2*）
appeared in 1789； several years after the suppression of the
insurrectionary movement of Pougachev； but it was regarded as a
sort of commentary on the demand for 〃liberty and land；〃 which
the Russian peasant had addressed to that leader； who had
answered it by a solemn promise that he would make the serf free
and prosperous。 Catherine not only ordered the immediate
suppression of the work of Radischev； but brought the author
before the Courts of Justice； accusing him of being a traitor to
his country。 Radischev was condemned to death； but this penalty
was commuted to perpetual banishment to Siberia。
It was not till the reign of Alexander the First that the
Russian Government began to take effectual measures to ameliorate
the social condition of the serf。 According to the account given
by those immediately around him； and especially by Adam
Czartorysky； Alexander was an avowed friend of peasant
emancipation。 He gave his firm support to the proposed law giving
the landlords the right to liberate their serfs； and even to
endow them with shares in the open fields if they paid for them。