PLAN

I. State reforms of the first half of the 18th century

a) decree on sole inheritance

b) table of ranks of 1722

c) reform of the state apparatus

d) local government reform

e) the status of the Russian monarch

II. Formation of a new system of law in the first half of the 18th century

a) military articles of 1716, types of crimes and punishments

b) judicial system and judicial process

c) civil, inheritance and family law

III. Codification of law in the second half of the 18th century

a) development of a new Code (1754)

IV. State reform of the second half of the 18th century

A) judicial reform 1775

b) letter of grant to the nobility

V. State reforms of the first half of the 19th century

a) reforms of the state apparatus

b) police reforms

VI Codification of law in the first half of the 19th century

a) civil law

b) criminal law

I. State reforms of the first half of the 18th century

The transformations that took place in Russia covered almost all aspects of the country’s life: economics, politics, science, everyday life, foreign policy, government system. They affected the situation of the working masses, church affairs, etc. In many ways, these transformations are associated with the activities of Peter I

a) Decree on unified inheritance

Peter's policies contributed to the sharp strengthening and consolidation of the nobility. It emerged from the top of the service class, and the bottom of the latter became state peasants. The nobility ousted the boyar aristocracy from power and strengthened its economic position. The Decree on Single Inheritance of 1714 legally equalized patrimonial and local property, while all real estate could now be received only by one of the heirs, and the rest - movable property. With these measures, Peter hoped, firstly, to prevent the fragmentation of the noble estates, and, secondly, to encourage the nobles to be more actively involved in military and civil service, entrepreneurship and study.

The decree on single inheritance could in the future lead to the emergence in Russia of a layer of nobility that did not depend on the favors of the state and the autocrat. IN Western Europe this helped limit royal power. However, nothing like this happened in Russia. Under Peter I, the dependence of the nobles on the state increased even more, and later this decree was canceled under pressure from the nobility.

b) table of ranks

After long and careful preparation, the “Table of Ranks” was published in 1722 - one of the most important documents of the era of strengthening tsarist autocracy, which determines the rank system and the procedure for promotion in the civil service - military and civilian. Having divided all civil and military positions into 14 ranks, she prioritized not the nobility of origin, but the personal merits of the nobles, and expanded access to public service for representatives of other classes. But this was not the ultimate goal of the transformation. Using the principle of personal service and strictly specified conditions for promotion up the ladder of ranks, Peter turned the mass of servicemen into a military-bureaucratic corps, completely subordinate to him and dependent only on him. At the same time, Peter sought to connect as closely as possible the very concept of “nobleman” with mandatory permanent service, requiring knowledge and practical skills. Only that nobleman is worthy of honor who serves. Peter reinforced his suggestions with actions: all the nobles were assigned to various institutions and regiments, their children were sent to schools, sent to study abroad, the tsar forbade those who did not want to study to marry, and took away their estates from those who hid from service.

c) reforms of the state apparatus

The most important direction of Peter's reforms was the reform of the state. The old device was not able to cope with the increasingly complex management tasks. Therefore, new orders and offices began to be created. The reform, while meeting the most pressing needs of the autocracy, was at the same time a consequence of the development of a bureaucratic tendency. It was with the help of strengthening the bureaucratic element in management that Peter intended to solve everything government issues. The reform led to the concentration of all financial and administrative powers in the hands of several governors - representatives central government, but also to the local creation of an extensive hierarchical network of bureaucratic institutions with a large staff of officials. The former “order - district” system has doubled: “order - province - province - district”.

A similar scheme was embedded in the idea of ​​organizing the Senate. Autocracy, which sharply strengthened in the second half of the 17th century. There was no need for institutions of representation and self-government. At the beginning of the 18th century, the activities of the Boyar Duma actually ceased, management of the central and local apparatus passed to the so-called “consultation of ministers” - a temporary council of heads of the most important representative departments.

The creation and functioning of the Senate was the next level of bureaucratization of senior management. The permanent composition of senators, elements of collegiality, personal oath, work program for a long period, strict hierarchical management - all this testified to the growing importance of bureaucratic principles, without which Peter could not imagine either effective management or autocracy as a political regime of personal power.

Peter chose as a model for the creation of the state reform he conceived government system Sweden.

Peter made great efforts to establish the effective functioning of the institutions he created and paid main attention to the development of numerous documents that were supposed to ensure the efficiency of the apparatus. He also created a model of the regulations of the central institution - the Admiralty Board.

Lomachenko Elena Alexandrovna

PLAN

I. State reforms of the first half of the 18th century
a) decree on sole inheritance
b) table of ranks of 1722
c) reform of the state apparatus
d) local government reform
e) the status of the Russian monarch

II. Formation of a new system of law in the first half of the 18th century
a) military articles of 1716, types of crimes and punishments
b) judicial system and judicial process
c) civil, inheritance and family law

III. Codification of law in the second half of the 18th century
a) development of a new Code (1754)

IV. State reform of the second half of the 18th century
a) judicial reform of 1775
b) letter of grant to the nobility

V. State reforms of the first half of the 19th century
a) reforms of the state apparatus
b) police reforms

VI Codification of law in the first half of the 19th century
a) civil law
b) criminal law

I. State reforms of the first half of the 18th century
The transformations that took place in Russia covered almost all aspects of the country's life: economics, politics, science, everyday life, foreign policy, and the political system. They affected the situation of the working masses, church affairs, etc. In many ways, these transformations are associated with the activities of Peter I

a) Decree on unified inheritance
Peter's policies contributed to the sharp strengthening and consolidation of the nobility. It emerged from the top of the service class, and the bottom of the latter became state peasants. The nobility ousted the boyar aristocracy from power and strengthened its economic position. The Decree on Single Inheritance of 1714 legally equalized patrimonial and local property, while all real estate could now be received only by one of the heirs, and the rest - movable property. With these measures, Peter hoped, firstly, to prevent the fragmentation of the noble estates, and, secondly, to encourage the nobles to be more actively involved in military and civil service, entrepreneurship and study.
The decree on single inheritance could in the future lead to the emergence in Russia of a layer of nobility that did not depend on the favors of the state and the autocrat. In Western Europe, this contributed to limiting royal power. However, nothing like this happened in Russia. Under Peter I, the dependence of the nobles on the state increased even more, and later this decree was canceled under pressure from the nobility.

b) table of ranks
After long and careful preparation, the “Table of Ranks” was published in 1722 - one of the most important documents of the era of strengthening the tsarist autocracy, defining the system of ranks and the procedure for promotion in the public service - military and civil. Having divided all civil and military positions into 14 ranks, she prioritized not the nobility of origin, but the personal merits of the nobles, and expanded access to public service for representatives of other classes. But this was not the ultimate goal of the transformation. Using the principle of personal service and strictly specified conditions for promotion up the ladder of ranks, Peter turned the mass of servicemen into a military-bureaucratic corps, completely subordinate to him and dependent only on him. At the same time, Peter sought to connect as closely as possible the very concept of “nobleman” with mandatory permanent service, requiring knowledge and practical skills. Only that nobleman is worthy of honor who serves. Peter reinforced his suggestions with actions: all the nobles were assigned to various institutions and regiments, their children were sent to schools, sent to study abroad, the tsar forbade those who did not want to study to marry, and took away their estates from those who hid from service.

c) reforms of the state apparatus
The most important direction of Peter's reforms was the reform of the state. The old device was not able to cope with the increasingly complex management tasks. Therefore, new orders and offices began to be created. The reform, while meeting the most pressing needs of the autocracy, was at the same time a consequence of the development of a bureaucratic tendency. It was with the help of strengthening the bureaucratic element in government that Peter intended to resolve all state issues. The reform led to the concentration of all financial and administrative powers in the hands of several governors - representatives of the central government, but also to the creation of a ramified local hierarchical network of bureaucratic institutions with a large staff of officials. The former “order - district” system has doubled: “order - province - province - district”.
A similar scheme was embedded in the idea of ​​organizing the Senate. Autocracy, which sharply strengthened in the second half of the 17th century. There was no need for institutions of representation and self-government. At the beginning of the 18th century, the activities of the Boyar Duma actually ceased, management of the central and local apparatus passed to the so-called “consultation of ministers” - a temporary council of heads of the most important representative departments.
The creation and functioning of the Senate was the next level of bureaucratization of senior management. The permanent composition of senators, elements of collegiality, personal oath, work program for a long period, strict hierarchical management - all this testified to the growing importance of bureaucratic principles, without which Peter could not imagine either effective management or autocracy as a political regime of personal power.
Peter chose the Swedish government system as a model for creating the government reform he planned.
Peter made great efforts to establish the effective functioning of the institutions he created and paid main attention to the development of numerous documents that were supposed to ensure the efficiency of the apparatus. He also created a model of the regulations of the central institution - the Admiralty Board.
Thus, a new system of central institutions was created along with the system higher authorities authorities and local government. Particularly important was the reform of the Senate, which occupied key position in the state system of Petra. The Senate was entrusted with judicial, administrative and legislative functions. He was in charge of colleges and provinces, the appointment and approval of officials. The unofficial head of the Senate, consisting of the first dignitaries, was the Prosecutor General, endowed with special powers and subordinate only to the monarch. The creation of the position of prosecutor general laid the foundation for an entire institution of the prosecutor's office, the model for which was the administrative experience of France.
Feeling the clergy’s rejection of his reforms, Peter I no longer held elections for a patriarch. In 1721, the patriarchate was abolished, and a Holy Governing Synod, consisting of representatives of the clergy appointed by the king. Thus, the church lost its already very relative independence and was placed under direct state control. Close dependence on the state slowly but steadily undermined the authority of church ministers among the people.

d) local government reform
The local government system was reorganized. In 1708-1710 the country was divided into 8 provinces. Previously, the main unit of administrative division was counties. Since 1719 they became provinces. The Chief Magistrate, who supervised the magistrates of other cities subordinate to him, became the head of the city management system. But these magistrates, whose main rights were legal proceedings, collecting taxes and maintaining order in the city, neither in essence nor in a number of formal characteristics had anything in common with the magistrates of Western European cities - effective bodies of self-government. As a result of the urban reform, a bureaucratic management mechanism was created, and representatives of the posad, who were part of the magistrates, were considered as officials of the centralized city management system, and their positions were even included in the Table of Ranks.

e) the status of the Russian monarch
Supreme power.Peter the Great concentrated in his hands, both legally and in reality, absolute unlimited power, eliminating those two institutions (the patriarchate and the boyar duma) in which opposition to the autocracy of the sovereign could in one way or another manifest itself.
The reforms of Peter I marked the establishment of an absolute monarchy. Russian absolutism, unlike the classical Western one, did not arise under the influence of the genesis of capitalism, the balancing of the monarch between the nobles and the third estate. He grew up on a serf-noble basis. Its formation was facilitated by the tradition of autocracy, the further strengthening of the centralization of power, and partly by the difficult international situation and the experience of Western European absolutism. October 22, 1721 during a solemn celebration Peace of Nystadt The Senate presented Peter with the titles of the Great, Emperor of All Russia and Father of the Fatherland. With Peter I accepting the title of Emperor, Russia became an empire.
CONCLUSION: The created new state not only increased the efficiency of public administration, but also served as the main lever for the modernization of the country. Many of Peter's innovations demonstrated amazing vitality. State institutions formed the backbone of Russian statehood throughout the 18th century, and partly further. Recruitment sets existed until 1874, and the Senate, Synod, Prosecutor's Office, Table of Ranks, as well as the entire Russian Empire, until 1917. This cannot be explained otherwise than by the limitations of Peter’s reforms of the state apparatus and their adequacy to the needs of the country. Based on some trends that emerged in the 17th century, he not only developed them, but, as if spurring the country, in a minimal historical period of time brought the country to a qualitatively higher level

II Formation of a new system of law in the first half of the 18th century

a) military articles of 1716, types of crimes and punishments
The results of the codification work of the first quarter XVIII V. steel: 1. Approved in 1714 and published in 1715. Military Articles, code of military criminal legislation.
Military articles consist of twenty-four chapters and two hundred and nine articles and are included as Part Two in the Military Regulations. The legal technique of this code is quite high: the legislator for the first time seeks to use the most capacious and abstract legal formulations and departs from the casual system traditional for Russian law.
The legislator paid attention to the degree of randomness - the line between careless and random crimes was very thin. Having highlighted the subjective side of the crime, the legislator still did not abandon the principle of objective imputation: often careless actions were punished in the same way as intentional ones: the result of the action was important for the court, not its motive. Together with the criminal, persons who did not commit the crime - his relatives - were held responsible. Responsibility was removed or mitigated depending on objective circumstances. The mitigating circumstances included the state of passion, the juvenile age of the offender, “unaccustomed to service” and official zeal in the heat of which the crime was committed.
It is characteristic that for the first time the law began to classify the state of intoxication as aggravating circumstances, which previously had always been a circumstance mitigating guilt. The legislator introduced the concepts of extreme necessity (for example, theft from hunger) and necessary defense. In a number of cases, the legislator provided for punishment for intent alone (in state crimes).
Articles included the following types crimes:
1. Against religion. This group included witchcraft and idolatry, which were punishable by death (burning) provided that the accused’s intercourse with the devil was proven. Otherwise, imprisonment and corporal punishment were imposed.
Blasphemy was punished by cutting off the tongue, and special blasphemy of the Virgin Mary and saints was punished by death. At the same time, the motive of malice in blasphemy was taken into account.
Non-compliance with church rituals and failure to attend divine services, and being drunk in church were punishable by a fine or imprisonment. Failure to report blasphemy was also punished.
"Seduction into schism" was punishable by hard labor, confiscation of property, and for priests - by being thrown on the wheel.
Bozhba, i.e. pronouncing the name of God “in vain” was punishable by a fine and church repentance.
2. State. The simple intent to kill or capture the king was punishable by quartering. Armed action against the authorities was also punished (the same punishment - perpetrators, accomplices and instigators were quartered).
Insulting the monarch with a word was punishable by cutting off the head. 3. K malfeasance included bribery, punishable by death, confiscation of property and corporal punishment.
4. Crimes against the order of government and court. These included the disruption and destruction of decrees, which was punishable by death. This also included such actions as forging seals, letters, acts and expense statements, for which corporal punishment and confiscation were imposed. For counterfeiting money - burning.
Crimes against the court included false oath, which was punishable by cutting off two fingers (which were used to take the oath) and exile to hard labor, perjury, punishable like false oath (in addition, church repentance was prescribed).
5. Crimes against "decency" close to the previous group, but not having a direct anti-state orientation. These included harboring criminals, which was punishable by death, running brothels, assigning false names and nicknames for the purpose of causing harm, singing obscene songs and uttering obscene speeches.
The decrees supplementing the Articles provided for punishments for rioting, drunkenness, playing cards for money, fighting and obscene language in public places. 6, Murder. The articles distinguished between intentional (punishable by beheading), careless (punishable by corporal imprisonment, fine, spitzrutens), accidental (unpunishable). The legislator considered murder for hire, poisoning, and the murder of a father, mother, baby or officer to be the most serious types of murder. The special ethical connotation of these compounds is obvious, and this was followed by a special type of punishment - wheeling.
Anyone who attempted suicide unsuccessfully after a successful rescue was sentenced to death. The surviving duelists were punished by hanging, the bodies of those killed in a duel (as well as suicides) were subjected to desecration.
Cutting off a hand was prescribed for a blow with a cane (a compound that borders between bodily injury and insult by action). The one who struck with his hand was publicly hit on the cheek by the profos (the lowest military rank who monitored the cleanliness of the latrines).
7. The articles introduce a property (quantitative) criterion for determining the severity of the crime - the amount of twenty rubles. For theft for an amount less than the established amount, the first time the criminal was punished with spitzrutens (going through the ranks six times), the second time the punishment was doubled, the third time his ears and nose were cut off and he was sent to hard labor. Anyone who stole property worth over twenty rubles was executed after the first time.
The death penalty was also imposed on persons who stole: for the fourth time, who stole during a fire or flood, from government agency, from his master, from his comrade, at the place where he was on guard, from a military warehouse. These persons were punished by death by hanging.
8. To crimes against morality included rape (the fact of which, according to the law, must be confirmed by expert evidence in addition to the statement), sodomy (punishable by death or exile to the galleys), bestiality (followed by severe corporal punishment), “fornication”, incest or communication between close relatives, bigamy, adultery (punishable by imprisonment and hard labor).
Basic purpose of punishment According to the Articles, there was intimidation, which was clear from special clauses such as “in order to instill fear and deter them from such obscenities.” Intimidation was combined with publicity of punishments.
The archaic element of revenge and retribution became complementary to intimidation. The criminal was cut off the organ through which he committed criminal acts.
Isolation, exclusion from society of the criminal, becomes a clearly expressed goal of punishment.
The labor of criminals was used in the construction of St. Petersburg, harbors, roads, canals, and when working in mines and factories.
Punishment and its application were characterized by a number of features: a) lack of individualization, when his relatives were punished along with the criminal or instead of him;
b) vagueness of wording (“he will be punished by the court”, “he will be punished according to the circumstances of the case”, etc.: the uncertainty of the verdict increased general condition fear); c) lack of formal equality before the law.
The death penalty according to the Articles was provided for in 122 cases, and in 62 cases - with a designation of the type; it was divided into simple and qualified.
The simple death penalty included beheading (mentioned 8 times), hanging (33 times) and execution (arquebus - 7 times). Qualified types of execution included quartering (alternately
limbs were cut off, then the head; sometimes limbs were torn off with forceps; mentioned 6 times); mentioned 3 times), hanging by the rib on an iron hook.
Corporal punishment was divided into self-harm, branding and painful.
Self-harm included cutting the tongue or burning it with a hot iron, cutting off a hand, fingers or joints, cutting off the nose and ears, and tearing out the nostrils.
Branding consisted of imposing special marks on the body of the criminal (forehead, cheeks, arms, back) with a red-hot iron. The purpose of this punishment is to distinguish the criminal from total mass, draw attention to it.
Painful punishments included beatings with a whip (up to 50 blows and “mercilessly”), batogs (rods, the number of blows was not regulated by the sentence), a whip (the number of blows was also not regulated), “cats” (a four-tailed whip), molts (in the navy, rope with knots), spitzrutens (thick rods when driven through the system three, six or twelve times; mentioned in 39 cases), rods. Painful types also included being shackled in iron, carrying a saddle and a gun, sitting on a wooden (very uncomfortable) horse, and walking barefoot on wooden stakes.
Hard labor was assigned in the form of a reference to work on the construction of harbors, fortresses, to work in mines and manufactories, forever or for a certain period. Exile to the galleys as an oarsman was equivalent to hard labor.
The use of imprisonment, sometimes accompanied by iron cuffs, is increasing. A milder form of imprisonment was arrest from a professional officer (up to two weeks).
Deprivation of honor and dignity was carried out in the form of disgraceful punishments and a special procedure - defamation. Shameful punishments included hanging by the feet after death, a blow from the provos on the cheek, nailing a name on the gallows, stripping women naked, and placing the body on a wheel.
The defamation procedure included the following actions: the name of the criminal was nailed to the gallows, the executioner broke the sword over the kneeling criminal, and he was declared a thief (rogue). The criminal was subjected to church anathema and declared an outlaw, excommunicated from the church and its rituals, from the sacraments, marriage and the possibility of taking an oath. He was virtually excluded from society. This punishment was provided in 11 cases.
A type of punishment close to defamation was political death, which consisted of confiscation of property, deprivation of honor, all rights, wealth and service.

b) judicial system and judicial process
The Senate was the highest court of appeal and its decisions were final.
Judicial functions (in the affairs of their officials) were vested in orders and collegiums.
New features of the organizational judicial system in the first quarter of the 18th century. became: the collegial structure of the courts and attempts (albeit unsuccessful) to separate the judicial organization. Absolutist state of the first quarter of the 18th century. called a policeman.
Already in 1733, police chief offices headed by a police chief existed in 23 cities. The police had armed formations.
In the field of litigation, already with late XVII V. the principles of search and the “inquisitorial” process prevail. In 1697, a decree was adopted “On the abolition of confrontations in court cases, on the use of questioning and search instead...”
Investigative principles were also introduced into civil disputes. The regulation of this type of process was given in a special “Brief description of processes or litigation”,
The law allowed the recusal of judges if there was a reason for it special reasons: the presence of a judge “in the property” of one of the parties, the presence between the judge and the party hostile relationship or debt obligations.
The first stage ended with the defendant's response. Such a response could be “guilty”; the defendant could “lock himself up” or confess, but indicating new circumstances of the case.
The second stage of the process began with the analysis of evidence. There were four types of evidence: personal confession, testimony, written evidence, and oath.
“The Queen of Evidence” is her own confession. Torture could be used to obtain it. Torture was not an extra-procedural measure; it was subject to careful regulation by law. They were tortured in proportion to their rank and class (nobles, as people of “delicate build,” should not have been tortured as cruelly as peasants), age (persons over seventy years of age were not subjected to torture, as well as minors under fifteen years of age), state of health (not pregnant women were tortured). You can only torture certain number times, after each procedure, the subject was given the opportunity to recover and receive treatment. Witnesses could also be tortured.
Unfit witnesses were considered persons under the age of fifteen and perjurers, recognized as such in court, cursed by the church, branded, defamed, tried for robbery, theft and murder, adulterers, foreigners about whom there is insufficient information. A “formal theory of evidence” was used: the value of each evidence was determined in advance and was unchanged. Thus, the testimony of a man was considered more thorough than the testimony of women, the testimony of a noble person was rated higher than the testimony of an ordinary person, the testimony of a scientist was considered more valuable than the testimony of an unscientific person, the testimony of a clergyman was more trustworthy than the testimony of a secular person.
Giving false testimony was punishable by cutting off the fingers. Entries in city and court books were considered most trustworthy, entries in trade books were rated lower (if there was no personal signature of the debtor), debt obligations and business letters were taken into account. Often written evidence needed to be supported by an oath.
The decision was made by a majority of votes; if they were equal, the vote of the president (chairman) prevailed. When ascertaining opinions, the survey began with the junior member of the court.
Sentences in cases where torture was used were approved by a senior official (field marshal or general), who could change the punishment.
Civil cases were considered by the courts in a different manner. In 1723, the decree “On the Form of Court” was adopted, which outlined a turn to the adversarial form of the trial. Heavy and cumbersome written proceedings were again replaced by oral proceedings. Shortened deadlines for the parties to appear in court were established. The defendant, who had not appeared, was sought with the beating of drums while the decree was read out. Judicial representation was expanded, which could be used in the analysis of any cases on the basis of a power of attorney or surety. The principal assumed responsibility for the actions of the representative. Although according to the decree “On the form of the court” it was supposed to consider criminal cases (except for cases of murder, robbery, red-handed robbery, schism and blasphemy), practice followed the path of applying this act mainly in civil process. Already in 1725, the range of cases considered on the basis of the “Brief Description of the Processes” was again expanded. The main trend In the development of the trial there was a strengthening of the investigative "inquisition" principles.

V ) civil, inheritance and family law
The right of patrimonial redemption was retained, the period of which was reduced in 1737 from forty to three years. The provision of the Decree on Single Inheritance, concerning the indivisibility of property with the ensuing consequences for the nobles left without land, constrained the freedom to dispose of real estate. To overcome the limitations, practice has developed a number of legal fictions: the introduction of dummies, the conclusion of additional or illegal transactions, etc. 1719 The extraction of minerals “discovered on private lands” becomes the prerogative of the state.
In 1772, the state monopoly on mineral resources and forests was abolished. Manufacturing production became an important area for the emergence of the elements of capitalism (without which the establishment of absolutism is impossible). But there was no free labor market.
A procedure was established for assigning state peasants to manufactories (in the public sector of the economy) and purchasing peasants with land, with the mandatory use of their labor in manufactories (in the private sector). These categories of peasants received the name assigned and possessional (1721).
The property rights of the acquirers were also limited here: it was forbidden to mortgage these villages, and their acquisition was permitted only with the authority of high competent authorities (Berg and Manufactory Collegiums).
In 1782, the right of industrialists, immigrants from the bourgeoisie and peasants, to acquire populated villages was abolished and the nobility again became the monopoly owner of populated lands.
The most common types of comradely associations were simple partnerships and faith partnerships. Russian entrepreneurs entered into joint-stock companies together with foreign shareholders. The concepts of legal entity and corporate property are beginning to take shape in the law.
etc.............

Book: History of the State and Law of Foreign Countries.Mudrak

20.1. State reforms of the first half of the 18th century.

The legal status of the nobility was significantly changed by the adoption of the Decree on Single Inheritance in 1714. This act had several consequences:

1) Legal merger of such forms land ownership, as a patrimony and an estate, led to the emergence of a single concept of “real estate”. On its basis, the consolidation of the class took place. The emergence of this concept led to the formation of more precise legal techniques, the development of the legal powers of the owner, and the stabilization of obligatory relations.

2) The establishment of the institution of primogeniture - inheritance of real estate by only one eldest son, not characteristic of Russian law, the purpose of which was to preserve the landed property of the nobility from fragmentation.

But the implementation of the new principle led to the emergence of significant groups of landless nobility, forced to take military or civil service. This provision of the Decree caused the greatest discontent among the nobles (it was repealed in 1731).

3) Having transformed the estate into hereditary land ownership, the Decree at the same time found a new way to attach the nobility to public service - the restriction of inheritance forced its representatives to serve for a salary. A large bureaucratic apparatus and a professional officer corps began to form very quickly.

The Table of Ranks (1722) became a logical continuation of the Decree on Single Inheritance. Its adoption indicated a number of new circumstances:

1. The bureaucratic approach in the formation of the state apparatus defeated the aristocratic one (associated with the principle of localism). Professional qualities, personal dedication and length of service become determining factors in career advancement.

2. The new system of ranks and positions formulated by the Table of Ranks legally formalized the status of the ruling class. His service qualities were emphasized: any higher rank could be awarded only after passing through the entire chain of lower ranks. The terms of service in certain ranks were established. Upon reaching the rank of eighth class, an official received the title of hereditary nobleman and could pass the title on by inheritance.

3. The table of ranks equalized military service with civilian service: ranks were awarded in both areas, the principles for promotion were the same.

4. Training for the new state apparatus began to be carried out in special schools and academies in Russia and abroad. The degree of qualification was determined not only by rank, but also by education and special training.

Bureaucratization of the state apparatus took place at different levels and over a long period. Objectively, it coincided with the processes of further centralization of power structures. Already in the second half of the 17th century, the remnants of immune feudal privileges and the last privately owned cities disappeared. Boyar Duma from the body that was in charge together with the tsar the most important matters in the state at the end of the 17th century it turns into a periodically organized council of ordered judges. It becomes a control body that monitors the activities of executive bodies (orders) and local government bodies. At the end of the 17th century, sectoral and territorial orders were united.

The process of centralization also affected the system of local authorities: from 1626, governors began to appear throughout the state, next to local government bodies (provincial, zemstvo huts, city clerks). At the end of the 17th century, their number grew to 250 thousand; they concentrated administrative, judicial and military power locally, subordinate to the center. Voivodes already in the 80s. The 17th century replaced elected local bodies throughout the state.

The reforms of the highest bodies of power and administration that took place in the first quarter of the 17th century are usually divided into three stages:

1699-1710 - partial transformations in the system of higher government bodies, in the structure of local self-government, military reform;

1710 - 1719 - liquidation of previous central authorities power and control, creation new capital, Senate, carrying out the first regional reform;

1719-1725 - creation of new sectoral management bodies for collegiums, implementation of the second regional reform, church government reform, financial and tax reform, creation legal basis for all institutions and the new procedure for serving.

In 1711, while Peter I was on a military campaign, the Senate was created. According to the Decree, the Senate, guided by the current legislation, was supposed to temporarily replace the Tsar. Later, the Senate becomes a permanent body. The competence of the Senate included: judicial and organizational-judicial activities, financial and tax control, foreign trade and credit powers.

In 1718, the Senate, in addition to the members appointed by the tsar, included all the presidents of the established institutions-colleges (foreign affairs, justice, military, budgetary).

In 1722, the Senate was reformed by three decrees of the emperor. Its composition has been changed. The Senate no longer included the presidents of the colleges.

To control the activities of the Senate, the post of Auditor General was introduced in 1715, who was later replaced by the Chief Secretary of the Senate. The reform of 1722 transformed the Senate into the highest body of central government.

Local government at the beginning of the 18th century. was carried out on the basis of the old model: voivodeship administration and a system of regional orders. During the reforms of Peter I, changes began to be made to this system. In 1702, the institution of voivode comrades, elected from the local nobility, was introduced. In 1705, this procedure became mandatory, which was supposed to strengthen control over the old administration.

In 1702, the institution of labial elders was abolished, and their functions were transferred to governors, who managed affairs together with elected noble councils.

In 1708, a new territorial division of the state was introduced: 8 provinces were founded, into which counties and cities were divided. In 1713 - 1714 the number of provinces increased to 11.

At the head of the province was placed a governor or governor-general, who united in their hands all administrative, judicial and military powers. Subordinate to them were 4 assistants in areas of management.

During the reform (by 1715), a system of local government was formed, which included three links: district - province - province.

Military reform was one of the main government reforms early XVIII V. After unsuccessful trips In Azov (1695-1696), the noble equestrian militia ended its existence. The regiments of Peter I.’s personal guard became a model for the transformation of military units.

In 1699, the formation of a recruiting system for the army began. Since 1723, based on the census, a capitation system for recruits was introduced. In 1719, the “Military Charter” was introduced, which regulated the composition and organization of the army, the relationship between commanders and subordinates, and the responsibilities of military officials.

In 1720, the Naval Charter was adopted.

In 1721, the Holy Synod was established, which became the highest body of church government. The Synod was headed by a secular official - the chief prosecutor. The management of church lands began to be carried out by the Monastic Order, which became an integral structure of the Synod. The monarch became the legal head of the church. He resolved issues of organizing church life and appointing hierarchs. The Church lost its role as an ideological opposition to secular authorities: any decisions of the monarch were not subject to discussion.

In October 1721, in connection with the victory in Northern War The Senate and the Holy Synod assign Peter I the title of “Father of the Fatherland, Emperor of All Russia,” and Russia becomes an empire.

The middle of the 17th century is the period of the beginning of the formation of bourgeois society, the period of absolutism. By this time, certain historical background for the formation of an absolute monarchy as a form of government. Since absolute monarchy is one of the forms centralized state, obviously, let's start considering the issue with the problem of liquidation in Russia political fragmentation and the formation of a centralized type of monarchy.

In connection with the growth of productive forces, handicraft manufactories appeared in the country, and then large-scale manufacturing, which at first mainly provided the army and navy. These are metallurgical manufactories in the Urals, Siberia, and Karelia. By 1750, Russian blast furnaces were smelting 2 million pounds of pig iron, and in the middle of the century, almost half of the iron was exported.

Centers light industry(cloth, sailing, linen and leather manufactories) were Moscow, Yaroslavl, Ukraine, Kazan, Kaluga. Just at the end of the first quarter of the seventeenth century. There were 25 textile factories in the country. The accelerated development of industry was facilitated by the economic policy of mercantilism pursued by the government of Peter I, which was expressed in the provision of benefits to manufactories, in protecting the merchants from foreign competition and other measures.

Feudal-serf relations created limited opportunities for the development of trade, since the feudal economy, by its nature, is based on small peasant subsistence farming, which is unproductive. The existence of old agrarian relations with the emergence of new forms of the emerging bourgeois state was one of the main features of Russian absolutism. This period in Russia is characterized by the actual merger of all such regions, lands and principalities into one whole. This merger was caused by increasing trade exchanges between regions, gradually growing commodity circulation, and the concentration of small local markets into one all-Russian market. Thus, there is a transition from a natural form of farming to a commercial one O.P. Klyuchevsky. Course of Russian history, M, 1957.

Russia at that time was famous for its fairs. These are Makaryevskaya near Nizhny Novgorod, Svenskaya near Bryansk, Irbitskaya in the Urals, etc. But the main shopping center was still Moscow. Back in the 16th century. The formation of economic prerequisites for the formation of an all-Russian market took place, which were preparations for the merger of local markets into a single one. An important factor economic development was foreign trade, which contributed to Russia’s involvement in the system of the emerging world capitalist market. The main buyers of Russian goods were England and Holland.

Actually, economic changes in the life of society do not predetermine the development of forms of statehood; economic changes correspond to changes in social structure society, and above all in the guise of the ruling class - the feudal lords. From the middle of the 17th century. the rights of feudal lords to land underwent changes: the Code of 1649. consolidated the rapprochement of estates with estates in terms of rights to exchange estates; in 1674-1676 the sale of estates was recognized for retired service people, heirs of landowners.

Against the backdrop of economic changes, a process of class consolidation of feudal lords (boyars and landed nobility) took place. In case of unconditional disagreements between “well-born” and “ vile people"tangible edges in their political situation, property and personal rights. All categories of privately owned peasants merged into the bulk of the serf-dependent peasantry.

In historical literature there is an opinion that at the turn of the XVII-XVIII centuries. The boyars, as a result of the abolition of localism and the liquidation of the Boyar Duma, disappeared as an estate and the nobility was the main support of the autocracy. But in fact, the liquidation of the boyars as a class began in the 18th century. the process of its feudalization in single class. This refutes the assertion that the privileged class in power was the nobility.

The most important social prerequisites of absolutism in Russia were expressed in the growth of feudal land ownership, in the attraction of townspeople's trade people as clerks in the clothing treasury, in various privileges of Russian merchants in the country's domestic markets. The main class support in the development of absolutism in Russia, despite the interest in it of the upper strata of the townsfolk population, were the serf-owning nobles. At the end of the seventeenth century. increased significantly land holdings the nobility, which by this time began to own most of the enslaved peasantry.

In the seventeenth century. the position of the nobility was strengthened, the importance of the feudal aristocracy was falling, internal borders were being destroyed ruling class, ruling class overall gradually became bureaucratized. The Table of Ranks (January 24, 1722) finally eliminated appointment to the civil service according to the degree of birth and placed merit to the fatherland in the foreground. A major role was played by the middle level of the clerkship, which was the executive force. It was this that was the basis, without which it would have been impossible to form the apparatus of the absolutist state and finalization absolute monarchy at the beginning of the 18th century. Specific feature historical development Russia in the 17th century. What happened was that the creation of the bureaucratic apparatus was used by the absolute monarchy to strengthen the dominance of the noble class. One of the main factors in the formation of Russian absolutism and a centralized state was the foreign policy factor: external danger from Turkey and Crimean Khanate, Poland and Sweden.

Transformations carried out by Peter I in the XVII - XVIII centuries. were not consistent and did not have a single plan; their order and features were dictated by the course of the war, political and financial possibilities in a given period. Historians distinguish three stages in the reforms of Peter I.

First(1699-170910) - changes in the system of government institutions and the creation of new ones, changes in the local government system, the establishment of a recruitment system.

Second(171011-171819) - the creation of the Senate and the liquidation of previous higher institutions, the first regional reform, the implementation of a new military policy, extensive construction of the fleet, the establishment of legislation, the transfer of government institutions from Moscow to St. Petersburg.

Third(171920-172526) - start of work of new, already created institutions, liquidation of old ones; second regional reform; expansion and reorganization of the army, reform of church government; financial reform; introduction of a new taxation system and a new civil service procedure.

All reform activities of Peter I were consolidated in the form of charters, regulations, decrees, which had the same legal force. On October 22, 1721, Peter I was given the title of Father of the Fatherland, Emperor of All Russia, Peter the Great. The acceptance of this title corresponded legal registration unlimited monarchy. The monarch was not limited in his powers and rights by any higher administrative bodies of power and control. The power of the emperor was so broad and strong that Peter I violated the established customs concerning the person of the monarch. In the interpretation of Article 20 of the Military Regulations of 1716. and in the Naval Charter of 1720. proclaimed: “His Majesty is an autocratic monarch who should not give an answer to anyone in his affairs, but he has the power and authority of his own states and lands, like a Christian sovereign, to rule according to his own will and goodness.” The Rules of the Ecclesiastical College (1721, January 25) stated: “Monarchal power is autocratic power, which God himself commands to obey for his conscience.” The monarch was the head of state, the church, the highest judge, supreme commander in chief, his exclusive competence was to declare war, conclude peace, and sign treaties with foreign states. The monarch was seen as the supreme bearer of legislative and executive power.

In 1722, Peter I issued the Charter of Succession to the Throne, according to which the monarch could determine his successor “recognizing the convenient one” and had the right, seeing “indecency in the heir,” to deprive him of the throne “seeing him worthy.” The legislation of that time defined actions against the tsar and the state as the most serious crimes, and anyone “who will plot any evil” and those who “helped or gave advice or did not inform” were punished by having their nostrils pulled out, the death penalty or deportation to the galleys - depending on the crime .

Seminar on the course “History of the Russian State and Law”
Subject: "The Russian state during the period of absolute monarchy"
students of group 406
Lomachenko Elena Alexandrovna

PLAN

I. State reforms of the first half of the 18th century
a) decree on sole inheritance
b) table of ranks of 1722
c) reform of the state apparatus
d) local government reform
e) the status of the Russian monarch

II. Formation of a new system of law in the first half of the 18th century
a) military articles of 1716, types of crimes and punishments
b) judicial system and judicial process
c) civil, inheritance and family law

III. Codification of law in the second half of the 18th century
a) development of a new Code (1754)

IV. State reform of the second half of the 18th century
a) judicial reform of 1775
b) letter of grant to the nobility

V. State reforms of the first half of the 19th century
a) reforms of the state apparatus
b) police reforms

VI Codification of law in the first half of the 19th century
a) civil law
b) criminal law

I. State reforms of the first half of the 18th century

The transformations that took place in Russia covered almost all aspects of the country's life: economics, politics, science, everyday life, foreign policy, and the political system. They affected the situation of the working masses, church affairs, etc. In many ways, these transformations are associated with the activities of Peter I

a) Decree on unified inheritance

Peter's policies contributed to the sharp strengthening and consolidation of the nobility. It emerged from the top of the service class, and the bottom of the latter became state peasants. The nobility ousted the boyar aristocracy from power and strengthened its economic position. The Decree on Single Inheritance of 1714 legally equalized patrimonial and local property, while all real estate could now be received only by one of the heirs, and the rest - movable property. With these measures, Peter hoped, firstly, to prevent the fragmentation of the noble estates, and, secondly, to encourage the nobles to be more actively involved in military and civil service, entrepreneurship and study.

The decree on single inheritance could in the future lead to the emergence in Russia of a layer of nobility that did not depend on the favors of the state and the autocrat. In Western Europe, this contributed to limiting royal power. However, nothing like this happened in Russia. Under Peter I, the dependence of the nobles on the state increased even more, and later this decree was canceled under pressure from the nobility.

b) table of ranks

After long and careful preparation, the “Table of Ranks” was published in 1722 - one of the most important documents of the era of strengthening the tsarist autocracy, defining the system of ranks and the procedure for promotion in the public service - military and civil. Having divided all civil and military positions into 14 ranks, she prioritized not the nobility of origin, but the personal merits of the nobles, and expanded access to public service for representatives of other classes. But this was not the ultimate goal of the transformation. Using the principle of personal service and strictly specified conditions for promotion up the ladder of ranks, Peter turned the mass of servicemen into a military-bureaucratic corps, completely subordinate to him and dependent only on him. At the same time, Peter sought to connect as closely as possible the very concept of “nobleman” with mandatory permanent service, requiring knowledge and practical skills. Only that nobleman is worthy of honor who serves. Peter reinforced his suggestions with actions: all the nobles were assigned to various institutions and regiments, their children were sent to schools, sent to study abroad, the tsar forbade those who did not want to study to marry, and took away their estates from those who hid from service.

c) reforms of the state apparatus

The most important direction of Peter's reforms was the reform of the state. The old device was not able to cope with the increasingly complex management tasks. Therefore, new orders and offices began to be created. The reform, while meeting the most pressing needs of the autocracy, was at the same time a consequence of the development of a bureaucratic tendency. It was with the help of strengthening the bureaucratic element in government that Peter intended to resolve all state issues. The reform led to the concentration of all financial and administrative powers in the hands of several governors - representatives of the central government, but also to the creation of a ramified local hierarchical network of bureaucratic institutions with a large staff of officials. The former “order - district” system has doubled: “order - province - province - district”.

A similar scheme was embedded in the idea of ​​organizing the Senate. Autocracy, which sharply strengthened in the second half of the 17th century. There was no need for institutions of representation and self-government. At the beginning of the 18th century, the activities of the Boyar Duma actually ceased, management of the central and local apparatus passed to the so-called “consultation of ministers” - a temporary council of heads of the most important representative departments.

The creation and functioning of the Senate was the next level of bureaucratization of senior management. The permanent composition of senators, elements of collegiality, personal oath, work program for a long period, strict hierarchical management - all this testified to the growing importance of bureaucratic principles, without which Peter could not imagine either effective management or autocracy as a political regime of personal power.

Peter chose the Swedish government system as a model for creating the government reform he planned.

Peter made great efforts to establish the effective functioning of the institutions he created and paid main attention to the development of numerous documents that were supposed to ensure the efficiency of the apparatus. He also created a model of the regulations of the central institution - the Admiralty Board.

Thus, a new system of central institutions was created together with a system of higher authorities and local self-government. Particularly important was the reform of the Senate, which occupied a key position in Peter’s state system. The Senate was entrusted with judicial, administrative and legislative functions. He was in charge of colleges and provinces, the appointment and approval of officials. The unofficial head of the Senate, consisting of the first dignitaries, was the Prosecutor General, endowed with special powers and subordinate only to the monarch. The creation of the position of prosecutor general laid the foundation for an entire institution of the prosecutor's office, the model for which was the administrative experience of France.

Feeling the clergy’s rejection of his reforms, Peter I no longer held elections for a patriarch. In 1721, the patriarchate was abolished, and a Holy Governing Synod, consisting of representatives of the clergy appointed by the king. Thus, the church lost its already very relative independence and was placed under direct state control. Close dependence on the state slowly but steadily undermined the authority of church ministers among the people.

d) local government reform

The local government system was reorganized. In 1708-1710 the country was divided into 8 provinces. Previously, the main unit of administrative division was counties. Since 1719 they became provinces. The Chief Magistrate, who supervised the magistrates of other cities subordinate to him, became the head of the city management system. But these magistrates, whose main rights were legal proceedings, collecting taxes and maintaining order in the city, neither in essence nor in a number of formal characteristics had anything in common with the magistrates of Western European cities - effective bodies of self-government. As a result of the urban reform, a bureaucratic management mechanism was created, and representatives of the posad, who were part of the magistrates, were considered as officials centralized system city ​​management, and their positions were even included in the Table of Ranks.

e) the status of the Russian monarch

Supreme power. Peter the Great concentrated in his hands, both legally and in reality, absolute unlimited power, eliminating those two institutions (the patriarchate and the boyar duma) in which opposition to the autocracy of the sovereign could in one way or another manifest itself.

The reforms of Peter I marked the establishment of an absolute monarchy. Russian absolutism, unlike classical Western absolutism, did not arise under the influence of the genesis of capitalism, the balancing of the monarch between the nobles and the third estate. He grew up on a serf-noble basis. Its formation was facilitated by the tradition of autocracy, the further strengthening of the centralization of power, and partly by the difficult international situation and the experience of Western European absolutism. On October 22, 1721, during the solemn celebration of the Peace of Nystadt, the Senate presented Peter with the titles of the Great, Emperor of All Russia and Father of the Fatherland. With Peter I accepting the title of Emperor, Russia became an empire.

CONCLUSION: The created new state not only increased the efficiency of public administration, but also served as the main lever for the modernization of the country. Many of Peter's innovations demonstrated amazing vitality. State institutions formed the backbone of Russian statehood throughout the 18th century, and partly further. Recruitment sets existed until 1874, and the Senate, Synod, Prosecutor's Office, Table of Ranks, as well as the entire Russian Empire, until 1917. This cannot be explained otherwise than by the limitations of Peter’s reforms of the state apparatus and their adequacy to the needs of the country. Based on some trends that emerged in the 17th century, he not only developed them, but, as if spurring the country, in a minimal historical period of time brought the country to a qualitatively higher level

II Formation of a new system of law in the first half of the 18th century

a) military articles of 1716, types of crimes and punishments

The results of codification work in the first quarter of the 18th century. steel: 1. Approved in 1714 and published in 1715. Military Articles, code of military criminal legislation.

Military articles consist of twenty-four chapters and two hundred and nine articles and are included as Part Two in the Military Regulations. The legal technique of this code is quite high: the legislator for the first time seeks to use the most capacious and abstract legal formulations and departs from the casual system traditional for Russian law.

The legislator paid attention to the degree of randomness - the line between careless and random crimes was very thin. Having highlighted the subjective side of the crime, the legislator still did not abandon the principle of objective imputation: often careless actions were punished in the same way as intentional ones: the result of the action was important for the court, not its motive. Together with the criminal, persons who did not commit the crime - his relatives - were held responsible. Responsibility was removed or mitigated depending on objective circumstances. The mitigating circumstances included the state of passion, the juvenile age of the offender, “unaccustomed to service” and official zeal in the heat of which the crime was committed.

It is characteristic that for the first time the law began to classify the state of intoxication as aggravating circumstances, which previously had always been a circumstance mitigating guilt. The legislator introduced the concepts of extreme necessity (for example, theft from hunger) and necessary defense. In a number of cases, the legislator provided for punishment for intent alone (in state crimes).

Articles included the following types crimes:

1. Against religion. This group included witchcraft and idolatry, which were punishable by death (burning) provided that the accused’s intercourse with the devil was proven. Otherwise, imprisonment and corporal punishment were imposed.

Blasphemy was punished by cutting off the tongue, and special blasphemy of the Virgin Mary and saints was punished by death. At the same time, the motive of malice in blasphemy was taken into account.

Non-compliance with church rituals and failure to attend divine services, and being drunk in church were punishable by a fine or imprisonment. Failure to report blasphemy was also punished.

"Seduction into schism" was punishable by hard labor, confiscation of property, and for priests - by being thrown on the wheel.

Bozhba, i.e. pronouncing the name of God “in vain” was punishable by a fine and church repentance.

2. State. The simple intent to kill or capture the king was punishable by quartering. Armed action against the authorities was also punished (the same punishment - perpetrators, accomplices and instigators were quartered).

Insulting the monarch with a word was punishable by cutting off the head. 3. K malfeasance included bribery, punishable by death, confiscation of property and corporal punishment.

4. Crimes against the order of government and court. These included the disruption and destruction of decrees, which was punishable by death. This also included such actions as forging seals, letters, acts and expense statements, for which corporal punishment and confiscation were imposed. For counterfeiting money - burning.

Crimes against the court included false oath, which was punishable by cutting off two fingers (which were used to take the oath) and exile to hard labor, perjury, punishable like false oath (in addition, church repentance was prescribed).

5. Crimes against "decency" close to the previous group, but not having a direct anti-state orientation. These included harboring criminals, which was punishable by death, running brothels, assigning false names and nicknames for the purpose of causing harm, singing obscene songs and uttering obscene speeches.

The decrees supplementing the Articles provided for punishments for rioting, drunkenness, playing cards for money, fighting and obscene language in public places. 6, Murder. The articles distinguished between intentional (punishable by beheading), careless (punishable by corporal imprisonment, fine, spitzrutens), accidental (unpunishable). The legislator considered murder for hire, poisoning, and the murder of a father, mother, baby or officer to be the most serious types of murder. The special ethical connotation of these compounds is obvious, and this was followed by a special type of punishment - wheeling.

Anyone who attempted suicide unsuccessfully after a successful rescue was sentenced to death. The surviving duelists were punished by hanging, the bodies of those killed in a duel (as well as suicides) were subjected to desecration.

Cutting off a hand was prescribed for a blow with a cane (a compound that borders between bodily injury and insult by action). The one who struck with his hand was publicly hit on the cheek by the profos (the lowest military rank who monitored the cleanliness of the latrines).

7. The articles introduce a property (quantitative) criterion for determining the severity of the crime - the amount of twenty rubles. For theft for an amount less than the established amount, the first time the criminal was punished with spitzrutens (going through the ranks six times), the second time the punishment was doubled, the third time his ears and nose were cut off and he was sent to hard labor. Anyone who stole property worth over twenty rubles was executed after the first time.

The death penalty was also imposed on persons who stole: for the fourth time, who stole during a fire or flood, from a government institution, from his master, from his comrade, at the place where he was on guard duty, from a military warehouse. These persons were punished by death by hanging.

8. To crimes against morality included rape (the fact of which, according to the law, must be confirmed by expert evidence in addition to the statement), sodomy (punishable by death or exile to the galleys), bestiality (followed by severe corporal punishment), “fornication”, incest or communication between close relatives, bigamy, adultery (punishable by imprisonment and hard labor).

Basic purpose of punishment According to the Articles, there was intimidation, which was clear from special clauses such as “in order to instill fear and deter them from such obscenities.” Intimidation was combined with publicity of punishments.

The archaic element of revenge and retribution became complementary to intimidation. The criminal was cut off the organ through which he committed criminal acts.

Isolation, exclusion from society of the criminal, becomes a clearly expressed goal of punishment.

The labor of criminals was used in the construction of St. Petersburg, harbors, roads, canals, and when working in mines and factories.

Punishment and its application were characterized by a number of features: a) lack of individualization, when his relatives were punished along with the criminal or instead of him;

b) vagueness of wording (“he will be punished according to the court”, “he will be punished according to the circumstances of the case”, etc.: the uncertainty of the verdict increased the general state of fear); c) lack of formal equality before the law.

The death penalty according to the Articles was provided for in 122 cases, and in 62 cases - with a designation of the type; it was divided into simple and qualified.

The simple death penalty included beheading (mentioned 8 times), hanging (33 times) and execution (arquebus - 7 times). Qualified types of execution included quartering (alternately

limbs were cut off, then the head; sometimes limbs were torn off with forceps; mentioned 6 times); mentioned 3 times), hanging by the rib on an iron hook.

Corporal punishment was divided into self-harm, branding and painful.

Self-harm included cutting the tongue or burning it with a hot iron, cutting off a hand, fingers or joints, cutting off the nose and ears, and tearing out the nostrils.

Branding consisted of imposing special marks on the body of the criminal (forehead, cheeks, arms, back) with a red-hot iron. The purpose of this punishment is to highlight the criminal from the crowd and to attract attention to him.

Painful punishments included beatings with a whip (up to 50 blows and “mercilessly”), batogs (rods, the number of blows was not regulated by the sentence), a whip (the number of blows was also not regulated), “cats” (a four-tailed whip), molts (in the navy, rope with knots), spitzrutens (thick rods when driven through the system three, six or twelve times; mentioned in 39 cases), rods. Painful types also included being shackled in iron, carrying a saddle and a gun, sitting on a wooden (very uncomfortable) horse, and walking barefoot on wooden stakes.

The use of imprisonment, sometimes accompanied by iron cuffs, is increasing. A milder form of imprisonment was arrest from a professional officer (up to two weeks).

Deprivation of honor and dignity was carried out in the form of disgraceful punishments and a special procedure - defamation. Shameful punishments included hanging by the feet after death, a blow from the provos on the cheek, nailing a name on the gallows, stripping women naked, and placing the body on a wheel.

The defamation procedure included the following actions: the name of the criminal was nailed to the gallows, the executioner broke the sword over the kneeling criminal, and he was declared a thief (rogue). The criminal was subjected to church anathema and declared an outlaw, excommunicated from the church and its rituals, from the sacraments, marriage and the possibility of taking an oath. He was virtually excluded from society. This punishment was provided in 11 cases.

A type of punishment close to defamation was political death, which consisted of confiscation of property, deprivation of honor, all rights, wealth and service.

b) judicial system and judicial process

The Senate was the highest court of appeal and its decisions were final.

Judicial functions (in the affairs of their officials) were vested in orders and collegiums.

New features of organizational judicial system in the first quarter of the 18th century. became: the collegial structure of the courts and attempts (albeit unsuccessful) to separate the judicial organization. Absolutist state of the first quarter of the 18th century. called a policeman.

Already in 1733, police chief offices headed by a police chief existed in 23 cities. The police had armed formations.

In the field of litigation, since the end of the 17th century. the principles of search and the “inquisitorial” process prevail. In 1697, a decree was adopted “On the abolition of confrontations in court cases, on the use of questioning and search instead...”

Investigative principles were also introduced into civil disputes. The regulation of this type of process was given in a special “Brief description of processes or litigation”,

The law allowed the recusal of judges if there were special grounds: the judge was “in property” with one of the parties, the presence of hostile relations or debt obligations between the judge and the party.

The first stage ended with the defendant's response. Such a response could be “guilty”; the defendant could “lock himself up” or confess, but indicating new circumstances of the case.

The second stage of the process began with the analysis of evidence. There were four types of evidence: personal confession, testimony, written evidence, and oath.

“The Queen of Evidence” is her own confession. Torture could be used to obtain it. Torture was not an extra-procedural measure; it was subject to careful regulation by law. They were tortured in proportion to their rank and class (nobles, as people of “delicate build,” should not have been tortured as cruelly as peasants), age (persons over seventy years of age were not subjected to torture, as well as minors under fifteen years of age), state of health (not pregnant women were tortured). You can only torture a certain number of times; after each procedure, the subject was given the opportunity to recover and receive treatment. Witnesses could also be tortured.

Unfit witnesses were considered persons under the age of fifteen and perjurers, recognized as such in court, cursed by the church, branded, defamed, tried for robbery, theft and murder, adulterers, foreigners about whom there is insufficient information. A “formal theory of evidence” was used: the value of each evidence was determined in advance and was unchanged. Thus, the testimony of a man was considered more thorough than the testimony of women, the testimony of a noble person was rated higher than the testimony of an ordinary person, the testimony of a scientist was considered more valuable than the testimony of an unscientific person, the testimony of a clergyman was more trustworthy than the testimony of a secular person.

Giving false testimony was punishable by cutting off the fingers. Deserving the greatest confidence entries in city and court books were considered, entries in trade books were rated lower (if there was no personal signature of the debtor), debt obligations and business letters were taken into account. Often written evidence needed to be supported by an oath.

Sentences in cases where torture was used were approved by a senior official (field marshal or general), who could change the punishment.

Civil cases were considered by the courts in a different manner. In 1723, the decree “On the Form of Court” was adopted, which outlined a turn to the adversarial form of the trial. Heavy and cumbersome written proceedings were again replaced by oral proceedings. Shortened deadlines for the parties to appear in court were established. The defendant, who had not appeared, was sought with the beating of drums while the decree was read out. Judicial representation was expanded, which could be used in the analysis of any cases on the basis of a power of attorney or surety. The principal assumed responsibility for the actions of the representative. Although according to the decree “On the form of the court” it was supposed to consider criminal cases (except for cases of murder, robbery, red-handed robbery, schism and blasphemy), practice followed the path of applying this act mainly in civil process. Already in 1725, the range of cases considered on the basis of the “Brief Description of the Processes” was again expanded. The main trend in the development of the judicial process was the strengthening of investigative “inquisition” principles.

V ) civil, inheritance and family law

The right of patrimonial redemption was retained, the period of which was reduced in 1737 from forty to three years. The provision of the Decree on Single Inheritance, concerning the indivisibility of property with the ensuing consequences for the nobles left without land, constrained the freedom to dispose of real estate. To overcome the limitations, practice has developed a number of legal fictions: the introduction of dummies, the conclusion of additional or illegal transactions, etc. 1719 The extraction of minerals “discovered on private lands” becomes the prerogative of the state.

In 1772, the state monopoly on mineral resources and forests was abolished. Manufacturing production became an important area for the emergence of the elements of capitalism (without which the establishment of absolutism is impossible). But there was no free labor market.

A procedure was established for assigning state peasants to manufactories (in the public sector of the economy) and purchasing peasants with land, with the mandatory use of their labor in manufactories (in the private sector). These categories of peasants received the name assigned and possessional (1721).

The property rights of the acquirers were also limited here: it was forbidden to mortgage these villages, and their acquisition was permitted only with the authority of high competent authorities (Berg and Manufactory Collegiums).

In 1782, the right of industrialists, immigrants from the bourgeoisie and peasants, to acquire populated villages was abolished and the nobility again became the monopoly owner of populated lands.

The most common types of comradely associations were simple partnerships and faith partnerships. Russian entrepreneurs entered into joint-stock companies together with foreign shareholders. The concepts of legal entity and corporate property are beginning to take shape in the law.

Contract agreement, previously already known to Russian legislation, in conditions of state industrial protectionism, is supplemented by a supply agreement with the customer, which, as a rule, was the state, its bodies or large private and mixed companies.

Personal hiring agreement consisted of performing work around the house, on the land, in industries, workshops, manufactories, factories and commercial enterprises. Free will when concluding an agreement was in a number of cases conditional: minor children and women entered into it only with the consent of their husband or father, serfs - with the consent of the landowner.

Sales and purchase agreement regulated the movement of any property (movable and immovable). The restrictions imposed by the monopolistic policy of the state concerned both the subject of the contract (prohibitions on selling ancestral real estate, certain types of minerals) and its conditions (established deadlines for the redemption of ancestral property, limiting the circle of entities purchasing real estate and peasants). Fraud, delusion and coercion committed during the conclusion of the contract were grounds for its annulment. Provision was made for purchase and sale with installment payment (“on credit”), advance payment or prepayment (“money in advance”). The general provisions of the purchase and sale agreement applied to the supply agreement.

Luggage agreement for movable property was concluded by any entities other than monks, who Spiritual regulations prohibited taking money and things for safekeeping.

Loan agreement with development monetary system and the body of securities (mortgages, shares, deeds of sale, bills, etc.) acquires new features. The law formally prohibited charging interest on loans; only in 1754 was six percent per annum officially established. In practice, interest was charged before. A loan was often associated with collateral, when the mortgage of land or movable property became a guarantee for payment of the debt.

A credit (borrowed) system of institutions headed by a borrowed bank is created. Since 1729, a system of private credit has been developing, merchants received the right to enter into bills of exchange. A bill of exchange (according to the Bill of Exchange Charter) became a bearer security included in money circulation.

The legislator, focusing on Western legal experience, tried to introduce the principle of primogeniture, in which the eldest son inherited. Russian tradition stood on the side youngest son, who, according to custom, succeeded his father. Practice has chosen a compromise path - inheritance of one son at the choice of the testator. The remaining children received shares of movable property as part of a testamentary disposition.

Daughters inherited property by will and only in the absence of sons.

In the absence of children at all, real estate under a will could be transferred to relatives (relatives bearing the same surname as the testator, i.e. in the previous terminology - “to the family”). Movable property in any shares could be divided between any claimants; the testator gives it “to whomever he wants.” Individual freedom of will has increased significantly compared to the inheritance system in the previous period.

The law still allowed for legal fiction from the era of manorial inheritance. In order for the property to pass to the daughter, her husband must take the surname of the testator, otherwise the property passed to the state (the property was considered escheat).

In the absence of a will, the legal order inheritance and the primordial principle here were indisputable: the eldest son inherited the property, and movable property was divided equally between the remaining sons. In 1731, the main provisions of the Decree on Single Inheritance were abolished. From that time on, inheritance by law is regulated as follows: real estate goes to all sons in equal shares, daughters receive one fourteenth, and the widow - one eighth, of movable property, daughters receive one eighth, and the widow - one fourth share. In this case, family real estate (primordial property) passes only to the heirs by law.

The will provided the testator with greater freedom of disposal: in addition to primordial and reserved property, he could redistribute the inheritance at his own discretion.

The Decree on Single Inheritance also introduced changes in the area family law. The marriage age for men was raised to twenty years, for women to seventeen years.

Close relatives and the insane (“fools,” in the terminology of the 1722 decree “On the testimony of fools in the Senate”) were prohibited from marrying.

Marriage required the consent of the spouses' parents and superiors for military personnel, as well as knowledge of arithmetic and geometry for nobles. Serfs married with the permission of their masters. The law required the free consent of those getting married.

Only church marriage was recognized. Since 1721, it was allowed to enter into mixed marriages with Christians of other faiths (Catholics, Protestants), marriage with people of other faiths was prohibited.

The reasons for divorce were the following: political death and reference to eternal hard labor, the unknown absence of one of the spouses for three years, entry into monasticism, adultery of one of the spouses, incurable illness or impotence, an attempt by one of the spouses on the life of the other, failure to report an impending crime against the monarch.

In 1753, a special act secured the separation of the obligations of the spouses, emphasizing the freedom of one of them from debts and obligations assumed by the other.

In relation to children, parents enjoyed almost the same power as before: they could be punished, sent to a monastery and put to work for a period of time.

By law, the father had to support his illegitimate children and their mother, but illegitimate children had no property rights and could not claim to participate in the inheritance by law.

According to the decree of 1714, guardianship over minor family members was assigned to the heir to real estate. Guardianship was established over minor children and continued until they came of age. The age of majority came for heirs of real estate at twenty years old, for heirs of movable property - at eighteen years old (for women at seventeen). Guardianship could also be established over insane and pathologically cruel landowners.

III Codification of law in the second half of the 18th century

a) development of a new Code (1754)

In 1754, a new commission began its work, whose task was again to rework the old one and create a new system of law.

Simple and qualifying (burning, wheeling, quartering) types of death penalty were provided for. The Senate approved this, but Elizabeth ordered that execution not be introduced into the future Code. And yet punitive practices in Russia remained brutal. Under Elizabeth, there were thousands of exiles, and in 1755, 49 people arrested for participation in the Bashkir uprising died under torture during interrogation.

The coup d'etat, as a result of which Catherine ascended the throne, interrupted work on the Code. The commission was transferred to Moscow, and at the beginning of 1763 it was dissolved.

Under Catherine, there were only a few cases of death sentences: Pugachev in 1755, Mirovich in 1764, two participants in the plague riot in Moscow in 1771.

Laid commission 1767 During the reign of Catherine II, the principles of “enlightened absolutism” were strengthened. Catherine II wrote "The Mandate" (1766), which formulated the principles of legal policy and legal system. A significant part of the text of the “Order” (250 articles) is borrowed from the treatise of C. Montesquieu “On the Spirit of Laws”, the treatise of C. Beccaria “On Crimes and Punishments” (about a hundred articles), the “Encyclopedia” of D. Diderot and d’Alembert. In general, borrowings accounted for more than 80% of the articles and 90% of the text. However, in its concept, the Order was an independent work that expressed the ideology of Russian “enlightened absolutism.”

In 1767, after the preparation of the "Nakaz", a new Commission for the preparation of the draft of the new Code. Deputies were sent to the commission: from the central government bodies, the district nobility, residents of each city, single-lords, or state peasants of each province, “non-nomadic foreigners” (Kazan, Siberian and Orenburg provinces), Cossacks.

IV State reform of the second half of the 18th century

a) judicial reform of 1775

1. For nobles in In each district, a district court was created, the members of which (a district judge and two assessors) were elected by the nobility for three years. The appellate authority for district courts was the upper zemstvo court, which consisted of two departments: criminal and civil cases. The Upper Zemstvo Court was created alone for the province. He had the right to audit and control the activities of district courts. The Upper Zemstvo Court consisted of a chairman and vice-chairman appointed by the emperor and ten assessors elected for three years by the nobility.

2. For townspeople The lowest court was the city magistrates, whose members were elected for three years.

3. State peasants sued in the district lower spread, in in which criminal and civil cases were examined by government-appointed officials.

4. In the provinces established conscientious courts, consisting of class representatives (chairman and two assessors)

5. The appellate and revision authority in the province became court chambers(in civil and criminal cases). 6. The Senate remained supreme judicial authority for ships throughout the system.

The reform of 1775 attempted to separate the court from the administration. The attempt failed: governors had the right to suspend the execution of sentences, some sentences (death penalty and deprivation of honor) were approved by the governor. The chairmen of all courts were appointed by the government.

b) letter of grant to the nobility

The most important act that carried out the legal consolidation of the nobility was "Certificate of Nobility"(full title "Certificate of the rights and benefits of the noble Russian nobility") 1785

The grounds for deprivation of the title of nobility could only be criminal offenses in which the moral failure of the criminal and dishonesty were manifested. The list of these crimes was exhaustive.

Personal rights nobles included the right to noble dignity, the right to protection of honor, personality and life, exemption from corporal punishment, from compulsory public service, etc.

Property rights of the nobility: full and unlimited right of ownership to acquire, use and inherit any type of property. The exclusive right of the nobles to buy villages and own land and peasants was established; the nobles had the right to open industrial enterprises on their estates, wholesale the products of their lands, purchase houses in cities and conduct maritime trade. The nobles created a society or Meeting, endowed with the rights of a legal entity, from among district leaders nobility. The Assembly elected candidates every three years. provincial leaders of the nobility. The latter's candidacy was approved by the governor or the monarch's representative in the province. Nobles who did not have land and were under 25 years of age were excluded from elections. During elections, the rights of nobles who did not serve and did not have officer ranks were limited. Nobles defamed by the court were expelled from the Assembly. The assembly also elected assessors to the estate courts of the province and police officials of the zemstvo police.

There were about 20 legal grounds for inclusion in the nobility. The “charter” preserved the difference between the rights of personal nobility and the rights of hereditary nobility. All hereditary nobility had equal rights(personal, property and judicial) regardless of the difference in titles and antiquity of the family.

V. State reforms of the first half of the 19th century

a) reforms of the state apparatus

In 1810, it was created as the highest legislative body developing bills, later approved by the emperor. State Council.

The Chairman of the State Council was the Emperor; in his absence, the meetings were presided over by a member of the Council appointed by him. The size of the body ranged from 40 to 80 members (the State Council existed until 1917). Members of the Council were appointed by the emperor or were members of it ex officio (ministers).

In 1802, the manifesto “On the Establishment of Ministries” was adopted, marking the beginning of a new form of sectoral management bodies. Unlike colleges ministries had greater efficiency in management matters, the personal responsibility of managers and executors increased, the importance and influence of offices and office work expanded. In 1802, eight ministries were formed: military ground forces, naval forces, foreign affairs, justice, internal affairs, finance, commerce, public education. The Ministry of Internal Affairs and the Ministry of Education were essentially new;

“In 1811, the “General Establishment of Ministries” was published, a document prepared by M.M. Speransky. On the basis of this act, the power of ministers was defined as the highest executive, directly subordinate to the supreme imperial power.

Ministers and fellow ministers (deputies) were appointed by the emperor, senior officials of ministries - by the emperor on the proposal of the minister, and lower ones - by the minister. In 1837, in connection with the division of counties into smaller administrative-territorial units (camps), the police position of bailiff appeared. This extends the police network to rural areas of the country. The police officer relied in his activities on the rural elected police: Sotsky And Tsesyatsky and on the patrimonial police of the landowners.

In the first half of the 19th century. an extensive network of prison institutions is being created. The first national act regulating this area was the “Code of Institutions and Statutes on Detainees and Exiles,” adopted in 1832.

In St. Petersburg alone in 1829, there were almost 3.5 thousand imprisoned peasants sent there by landowners in prisons. The courts of second instance in the provinces were the chambers of criminal and civil courts. The civil court chamber also performed the functions of a notary. Since 1808, commercial courts began to be formed, which considered bills of exchange, cases of commercial insolvency, etc. Others acted departmental courts: military, maritime, mountain, forest, spiritual, communications, volost peasant courts. In the capitals there were court courts for matters of estates.

VI. Codification of law in the first half of the 19th century

a) civil law

Family law has preserved the principles developed in the 18th century. Obstacles to marriage were: being in another marriage, monasticism, difference of religion, kinship and affinity (up to the fourth degree inclusive), condemnation to celibacy (for adultery). The suspension of marriage was caused by: lack of consent to marriage on the part of parents or superiors, the presence of kinship or property from the fifth to seventh degree. If such a marriage was concluded, it retained legal force. A wife who committed adultery could be imprisoned (for a short period).

It was possible to bequeath to anyone and anything from the property (or all property). But wills of real estate in favor of Jews, Poles and foreigners in those places where they could not own real estate were not valid. Family primordial and reserved estates could not be bequeathed. The order of inheritance by law was as follows: all blood relatives were called upon to inherit, without distinction of degree (property did not give the right to inherit by law). Relatives were called upon to inherit according to the degree of consanguinity, but not jointly. Those closest to them completely excluded those who were farther from the heritage. The closest heirs were children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren. When there were no sisters, the brothers equally divided their parents' property. When there were no sons or grandsons, the daughters divided the inheritance equally. If there were sons and daughters, the latter received one fourteenth of the real estate and one eighth of the movable property. Everything else was divided equally between the sons.

The testator's children excluded grandchildren from inheritance, except in cases where their parents died. Then they inherited the shares due to their parents.

In the absence of descendant relatives, the inheritance passed to lateral relatives, the closest lateral relatives excluded further ones. Parents were excluded from inheritance in favor of the most distant lateral relatives. Parents had the right to lifelong use of the property of their children who died without offspring and left no will.

The spouses inherited after each other in the amount of one seventh of real estate and one fourteenth of movable property. The spouse could bequeath the ancestral property to the other spouse for lifelong use.

b) criminal law

In 1845, a new criminal code was adopted "Code on criminal and correctional punishments."

The Code of 1845 listed the grounds on which imputation was eliminated: accident, infancy (imputation was excluded under 10 years of age), insanity, insanity, unconsciousness, error (accidental or the result of deception), coercion, force majeure, necessary defense.

The subjective side was divided into: 1) intent: a) with a premeditated intention, b) with a sudden impulse, unpremeditated;

2) negligence in which: a) the consequences of the act could not be easily foreseen, b) the harmful consequences could not be foreseen at all.

The Code distinguished between complicity in a crime: a) by prior agreement of the participants and b) without prior agreement. Accomplices were divided into instigators, accomplices, instigators, instigators, accomplices, connivers, and concealers.

Since the time of Elizabeth, executions have almost stopped. They were resumed in connection with the Decembrist movement by Nicholas 1. When he was given a death sentence to sign for a military crime, he, with the words: “Execution has been abolished in Russia,” sentenced the perpetrator to 10 thousand blows with a cane.

The Code of Laws of 1832 provided for execution only for serious state crimes. In 1845 the whip was abolished. The spitz-rutens were preserved when being driven through the ranks; a doctor was present, and if there was a clear threat to life, the execution was stopped. But often this only prolonged the agony by 1-2 days.

Criminal penalties included: deprivation of all rights of estate and death penalty, deprivation of all rights of the estate and exile to hard labor, deprivation of all rights of the estate and exile to settlement in Siberia, deprivation of all rights of the estate and exile to settlement in the Caucasus. Deprivation of all rights of the estate meant civil death: deprivation of rights, benefits, property, termination of conjugal and parental rights.

Corrective punishments included: deprivation of all special rights and benefits and exile to Siberia, transfer to correctional prison departments, exile to other provinces, imprisonment in prisons, fortresses, arrest, reprimand in the presence of the court, remarks and suggestions made by the court or an official , monetary penalties. Deprivation of all special rights and advantages consisted in deprivation of honorary titles, nobility, ranks, insignia, the right to enter the service, enroll in the guild, be a witness and guardian,

All these punishments were considered common. They were supplemented by special punishments (exclusion from service, removal from office, demotion, reprimand, deduction from salary, reprimand) and exceptional punishments (deprivation of Christian burial, partial deprivation of the right of inheritance).

References

1. History of Russia Textbook 1999 edition. Moscow

2. History of state and law I.A. Isaev