Reform in the field of education. Portrait. New appointments. Start. The activities of Alexander III are called counter-reforms. Judicial reform. Tasks. Domestic policy of Alexander III. Forced Russification. Zemstvo counter-reform. Judicial counter-reform (1887-1894). Replacing the peasant administration with the noble one. Counter-reforms. National and religious politics. What was the nature of the policy? Resignations.
“Economic development under Alexander 3” - Main directions of economic policy. Economic recovery of the 90s. Financial reform. Directions of economic policy I.A. Vyshnegradsky. Directions of economic policy S.Yu. Witte. Agriculture. Trans-Siberian Railway. Results of economic policy S.Yu. Witte. Peasants. Economic development during the reign of Alexander III. N.H.Bunge. Features of industrial development.
"Alexander III and his domestic policy" - National and religious politics. Censorship. Draw conclusions. Alexander ruled in place of his deceased brother. Beginning of the reign of Alexander III. Measures to alleviate peasants' land shortage. What problems did Alexander III solve? Economy under Alexander III. Regulations on measures to protect public order. Meeting of government officials. Alexander III. Peasant question. Alexander III and his domestic policy.
“Counter-reforms in the internal policy of Alexander III” - Law on the compulsory purchase by peasants of their plots. Domestic policy of Alexander III. Alexander III. Document. Police state. Peasants leaving the community. Change of government. Ideology. Regulations on measures to protect public order. Regulations on provincial and district zemstvo institutions. Measures to alleviate peasants' land shortage. Temporary rules on press. Education Policy.
“The Internal Policy of Alexander 3” - Alexander III. Emperor Alexander III. Ministry D.A. Tolstoy. It was not possible to completely eliminate the judicial statutes of 1864. Control over the volost court. 1884 – student unrest. Ignatiev proposed convening a Zemsky Sobor. Ministry of N.P. Ignatiev. Resignation of N.P. Ignatiev. The establishment of juries in criminal courts turned out to be completely false for Russia. V.P. Meshchersky. From Pobedonostsev's article.
“Counter-reforms of Alexander III” - March 8, 1881 - meeting of the State Council on the issue of the “Constitution” of M. T. Loris-Melikov. Limitation of fines. Limiting the working day of children under 15 years of age to 8 hours. S. Yu. Witte Minister of Finance in 1892 - 1903 Death of a migrant. 1889. Protectionism 1897 - financial reform. The total length is 9332 km. Alexander III. Initially, she was the bride of Alexander's older brother Nikolai.
On December 28, 1881, decrees were issued on reducing redemption payments and on the mandatory transfer of peasants who were in a temporarily obliged position to redemption. According to the first decree, the redemption payments of peasants for the plots provided to them were reduced by 16%, and according to the second decree, from the beginning of 1883, the 15% of former
landowner peasants.
On May 18, 1882, the Peasant Land Bank was established (began to function in 1883), which issued loans for the purchase of land to both individual householders and rural societies and partnerships. The establishment of this bank pursued the goal of mitigating the severity of the agrarian question. As a rule, landowners' lands were sold through him. Through him in 1883-1900. 5 million dessiatines of land were sold to peasants.
The law of May 18, 1886, from January 1, 1887 (in Siberia since 1899), abolished the poll tax from tax-paying classes, introduced by Peter I. However, its abolition was accompanied by a 45% increase in taxes from state peasants by transferring them from 1886 for redemption, as well as an increase in direct taxes from the entire population by 1/3 and indirect taxes by two times.
In the late 80s and early 90s, a series of laws were issued aimed at preserving the patriarchal foundations in the countryside, primarily the patriarchal peasant family and community, that were collapsing under the pressure of capitalism. The collapse of the old, patriarchal family was expressed in the rapid increase in the number of family divisions. According to the Ministry of Internal Affairs, in the first two post-reform decades, an average of 116 thousand family divisions occurred annually, and in the early 80s their average annual number increased to 150 thousand. On March 18, 1886, a law was passed according to which family division could take place only with the consent of the head of the family ("bolshaka") and with the permission of at least 2/3 of the householders at the village gathering. However, this law could neither suspend nor limit family divisions, the number of which continued to increase even after its publication, with more than 9/10 divisions occurring “unauthorized,” without the sanction of the community and local authorities. Forced “reunifications” of separated families did not help either.
The problem of the peasant land community occupied an important place in the agrarian-peasant policy of the autocracy. Even during the preparation and implementation of the reform of 1861, both opponents and supporters of preserving the community were identified among government officials. The first believed that household peasant land ownership would create a significant layer of owners - the pillars of social stability in the country, and the equalization of allotments and mutual responsibility were considered by them as the reason for the too slow economic development of the village. The latter viewed the community as an important fiscal and police instrument in the countryside and a factor preventing the proletarianization of the peasantry. As you know, the second point of view won, which was reflected in the laws of 1861.
In the early 90s, laws were passed aimed at strengthening the peasant community. The law of June 8, 1893 limited periodic land redistributions, which from now on were allowed to be carried out no more often than every 12 years, and with the consent of at least 2/3 of householders. The law of December 14 of the same year “On certain measures to prevent the alienation of peasant allotment lands” prohibited the mortgaging of peasant allotment lands, and the leasing of allotments was limited to the boundaries of one’s community. According to the same law, Article 165 of the “Regulations on Redemption” was abolished, according to which a peasant could redeem his plot ahead of schedule and separate from the community. The law of December 14, 1893 was directed against the increasing frequency of pledges and sales of peasant allotment lands - in this the government saw a guarantee of the solvency of the peasant household. With such measures, the government sought to further tie the peasant to the plot and limit his freedom of movement.
However, redistribution, sale and lease of peasant allotment lands, abandonment of allotments by peasants and departure to the cities continued, bypassing laws that turned out to be powerless to stop objective, capitalist processes in the countryside. Could these government measures also ensure the solvency of the peasant household, as evidenced by official statistics? Thus, in 1891, an inventory of peasant property was made in 18 thousand villages in 48 provinces; in 2.7 thousand villages, peasant property was sold for next to nothing to pay off arrears. In 1891-1894. 87.6 thousand peasant plots were taken away for arrears, 38 thousand arrears were arrested, about 5 thousand were forced into forced labor.
Based on its main idea of the primacy of the nobility, the autocracy in the agrarian question carried out a number of measures aimed at supporting noble land ownership and landowner farming. In order to strengthen the economic position of the nobility, on April 21, 1885, on the occasion of the 100th anniversary of the Charter of the Nobility, the Noble Bank was established, which gave loans to landowners secured by their lands on preferential terms. Already in the first year of its activity, the bank issued loans to landowners in the amount of 69 million rubles, and by the end of the 19th century. their amount exceeded 1 billion rubles.
In the interests of noble landowners, on June 1, 1886, the “Regulations on Hiring for Rural Work” were published. It expanded the rights of the employer-landowner, who could demand the return of workers who left before the expiration of the hiring period, make deductions from their wages not only for material damage caused to the owner, but also “for rudeness,” “disobedience,” etc., subject to arrest and bodily harm. punishment. In order to provide landowners with labor, a new law on June 13, 1889 significantly limited the resettlement of peasants. The local administration undertook to send the “unauthorized” migrant to his previous place of residence. And yet, despite this harsh law, in the ten years after its publication the number of migrants increased several times, and 85% of them were “unauthorized” migrants.
4.3 Introduction of the institution of zemstvo chiefs
On July 12, 1889, the “Regulations on Zemstvo Precinct Chiefs” were published. In the 40 provinces of Russia to which this “Regulation” applied (mainly to provinces with landownership), 2,200 zemstvo sections (about 4-5 per county) were created, headed by zemstvo chiefs. In the districts, a district congress of zemstvo chiefs was established, consisting of an administrative and judicial presence. The functions of the abolished district presence for peasant affairs and the magistrate's court were transferred to him (the magistrate's court was retained only in Moscow, St. Petersburg and Odessa), which significantly strengthened the administrative and police power of zemstvo chiefs. The need to introduce the institution of zemstvo chiefs was explained by the “lack of firm government power close to the people.”
Zemstvo chiefs were appointed by the Minister of Internal Affairs on the proposal of governors and provincial leaders of the nobility from local hereditary noble landowners. The zemstvo chief had to have a certain property qualification (over 200 acres of land or other real estate worth 7,500 rubles), have a higher education, three years of service in the position of either a peace mediator, or a justice of the peace, or a member of the provincial presence for peasant affairs. If there was a shortage of candidates who met these requirements, local hereditary nobles with secondary and even primary education, who were in military or civilian ranks, regardless of length of service, could be appointed zemstvo commanders, but the property qualification for them was doubled. In addition, the Minister of Internal Affairs “in special cases,” bypassing the specified conditions, could appoint any of the local nobles as a zemstvo chief, and according to the law of 1904, these restrictions were lifted.
05.04.2016
The new legislative initiative has become the subject of wide discussion in the media - a bill has appeared that will complicate the inheritance procedure. It is proposed to forcefully put up for auction apartments inherited by citizens in shares.
Now, having received a share in the inheritance, Russians can dispose of real estate at their own discretion: they can live in the inherited apartment, they can sell or donate it to other owners or third parties. Of course, it is not always possible to resolve the issue of inheritance peacefully; sometimes entire family wars break out over the notorious “pieces” of an apartment. It happened that a share in an apartment became a tool of pressure on relatives, relations with whom had cracked - one of the heirs transferred his share to scammers, who then tried to take possession of the entire apartment. This is often called "apartment raiding." According to the authors of the new bill, an apartment or house that is inherited by two or more people will have to be sold and the proceeds divided between the heirs.
In this way, the authors of the bill want to protect their compatriots from fraud. Here is how the author himself, deputy Andrei Svintsov, comments on the idea: “When there is an inheritance, a notary is always present. The notary gives all heirs the right to find a buyer for this apartment within 3 months. If within 3 months (this is our proposal) such a buyer is not found, then this apartment is put up on public platforms. If all family members agree, then this 3-month period can be extended to 6 months.”
Correspondents from the Vesti FM radio station understood the intricacies of the legislative initiative. Member of the Board of the Federal Notary Chamber Alexandra Ignatenko was asked to comment on the idea of the deputies. Alexandra Vladimirovna noted that controversial issues regarding inheritance can be resolved in court. And notaries, to whom the authors of the bill want to give the right to put up inherited apartments for auction, do not see the need to make changes to the Civil Code: “When heirs inherit any property as shared ownership, very often they use it jointly in good faith. Determine the order of use. If they do not reach an agreement, then the division of property occurs by court decision. It is one thing when heirs have the opportunity to reach an agreement independently and voluntarily, but here there will be a forced seizure of the inherited property. In my opinion, this does not correspond to either the spirit of the law or the spirit of the Constitution,” said Alexandra Ignatenko.
The opinion of representatives of the notary community is shared by the deputy chairman of the Duma Committee on Housing Policy, Alexander Sidyakin, who doubts that the bill proposed by deputy Svintsov will receive parliamentary support: “This initiative contradicts our understanding of civil law. I don’t think such a norm is possible. If it is not a micro-share, then compulsory sale is unconstitutional. Then we need to change the Constitution. By inheritance a person receives property. He has the right to dispose of it independently. And even if such a norm is adopted, I don’t think that the Constitutional Court will recognize it as consistent with the Constitution.”
The main thing in solving any problem is taking timely measures. The legislator has recently taken a serious step in the fight against “apartment raiding” by instructing the notary to participate in ensuring the legality and transparency of transactions during which offenses most often occur.
On December 29, 2015, Federal Law No. 391-FZ was signed, according to which, starting from 2016, transactions involving the sale of a share in a common property right to an outsider are subject to mandatory notarization. Also, transactions for the sale of land shares and real estate owned by minors or citizens recognized as having limited legal capacity, as well as transactions related to the disposal of real estate under the terms of trust management or guardianship, are subject to notarization.
This is a big step towards a civilized solution to the problems of shared ownership.
Now, when certifying a transaction for the alienation of a share in an apartment, the notary will check whether the remaining co-owners were offered to exercise the right of first refusal at a price not exceeding that included in the transaction being certified. This eliminates the mechanism for selling shares at a reduced price, which is what the apartment raiders used. Of course, this law does not eliminate all the loopholes that fraudsters can take advantage of, but it opens the way for further regulation of these difficult relationships without violating the constitutional rights of the owner.
summary of other presentations"Alexander's Domestic Policy 3" - Censorship counter-reform. Zemstvo bosses. In 1887, the property qualification for jurors was significantly increased. M.N. Katkov. Control over the volost court. Ministry of N.P. Ignatiev. V.P. Meshchersky. Alexander III. The establishment of juries in criminal courts turned out to be completely false for Russia. Resignation of N.P. Ignatiev. Class composition of zemstvo assemblies. Ignatiev proposed convening a Zemsky Sobor. Ministry D.A. Tolstoy.
"Alexander's Counter-Reforms 3" - Alexander ruled in place of his deceased brother. Forced Russification. The activities of Alexander III are called counter-reforms. What was the nature of the policy? Start. Tasks. Domestic policy of Alexander III. National and religious politics. Portrait. Resignations. New appointments. Judicial counter-reform (1887-1894). Replacing the peasant administration with the noble one. Zemstvo counter-reform. Educators. Judicial reform.
“Counter-reforms of Alexander III” - Measures to reduce peasant land shortage. The task is to spy on opponents of the government. S. Yu. Witte Minister of Finance in 1892 - 1903 Prohibition of paying for labor goods through factory shops. Economic policy. Limitation of fines. The number of city council meetings was limited. Note. Basic ideas of kingship. Persecution of representatives of certain religions. 1882 – establishment of the Peasant Bank.
“Economic development under Alexander 3” - Financial reform. Characteristics of economic policy. Agriculture. Main directions of economic policy. Development of agriculture. The main directions of economic policy N.Kh. Bunge. Characteristic. Compare the economic policies of Alexander II and Alexander III. Trans-Siberian Railway. Economic development during the reign of Alexander 3. N.A. Vyshnegradsky.
"Alexander III and his domestic policy" - Alexander III 1881-1894. Law on zemstvo district chiefs. Meeting of government officials. What events are being told? Educators. Counter-reform. New appointments. Domestic policy. Temporary rules on press. M.T. Loris-Melikov. Social origin of the populists. Alexander III. Peasant Bank. Portrait. Reign of Alexander III. Rules regarding Jews. Circular about cook's children.
“Counter-reforms in the domestic policy of Alexander III” - Change of government. Domestic policy of Alexander III. Temporary rules on press. Regulations on provincial and district zemstvo institutions. Ideology. Events. Personalities. Education Policy. Regulations on measures to protect public order. Measures to alleviate peasants' land shortage. Alexander III. Law on compulsory purchase by peasants of their plots. Peasants leaving the community. Document.
By 1880, in 29 Great Russian and 3 Little Russian provinces, which were covered by the indicated Local provisions on the land structure of former landowner peasants, more than 85% of the peasants were transferred to ransom, but the remaining 15% remained in a temporary position and paid quitrent to their landowners. According to the Regulations of February 19, 1861, after 20 years, i.e., from February 1881, there was a change in the quitrent, that is, a change in the size of the quitrent paid by the peasants. But in the conditions of the revolutionary situation at the turn of the 70-80s of the XIX century. the government made some concessions to the peasants: it decided to transfer all temporarily liable peasants to compulsory redemption (in this case, the terms of the redemption were used that were applied when carrying out the redemption at the unilateral request of the landowner in accordance with the law, namely: the government paid the landowners only 4/5 of the redemption amount, which was then collected from the peasants over the next 49 years; another concession was the addition of 20 million rubles of arrears accumulated on redemption payments and a reduction in the size of the redemption payments themselves (see the following document, reproduced from the text: Complete collection of laws). Russian Empire. Collection 3. T. I. No. 577.
In Bose, our late father, Emperor Alexander II, freeing the former landowner peasants from serfdom and establishing mandatory, in the sense of a transitional measure, land relations between them and the landowners, meant that these relations should end over time through the redemption of their plots by peasants into ownership, with or without government assistance. Both the Regulations of February 19, 1861, and the legislation subsequently issued, in development thereof, tended towards this ultimate goal. By virtue of them, on the largest part of the landowners' estates, the peasants have already moved into the category of peasant owners, and there are now relatively few temporarily obliged peasants. Further leaving these latter in obligatory relations with the landowners, preventing the stable structure of both peasant and landowner land ownership, would be associated with important inconveniences, in the consciousness of which the nobility of some provinces recently themselves petitioned for the transfer of all temporarily obliged peasants to be redeemed in the form of a common government measure.
In consideration of this, even on the instructions of our most kind parent, considerations were drawn up on the termination of obligatory relations between the former landowner peasants and landowners, with the possible observance of the benefits of both sides. These considerations, in their general form, received the highest approval from the late sovereign in February of this year. Therefore, detailed assumptions on this subject were, at our command, considered first in the Main Committee on the structure of the rural state, and then in the State Council.
Considering, according to the behest and example of our unforgettable parent, it is our sacred duty to take care of the well-being of our loyal subjects of every rank and status and following his good plans for the best possible structure for the peasant population, we command:
1. Those remaining in obligatory relations with the landowners of the former landowner peasants in the provinces that were in the Great Russian and Little Russian states, shall be transferred to redemption and classified as peasant-owners from January 1, 1883.
2. To carry out this measure on the basis of this date approved by us and the attached Regulations,
3. Before the transfer of temporarily liable peasants for redemption, according to the published Regulations, these peasants must be with the landowners in the same relations in which they are with them now; The redemption of plots of land by peasants can, until that time, be carried out on the previously existing basis.
The Governing Council will not leave this proper order to be carried out.
Without the assistance of the government, such redemption transactions were concluded by voluntary agreement between peasants and landowners, when the peasants paid the entire redemption amount directly to their landowner. But in practice, almost all redemption transactions, both at the unilateral request of the landowner, and under decrees on compulsory redemption, and even in voluntary transactions, were carried out with the assistance of the government, i.e., the treasury paid the landowners the entire redemption amount established by law, which it then recovered from peasants
...subsequently issued, in the development of these, legalizations. - We are talking about decrees: June 27, 1862 (permitting a period for the ransom of peasants who were in corvée), March 1, June 26, July 30 and November 2, 1863 on the transfer to compulsory ransom of peasants in Lithuania, the western Belarusian provinces and the Right Bank Ukraine.
The text is reproduced from the edition: The end of serfdom in Russia (documents, letters, memoirs, articles). - M., 1994. S. 459 - 460.
