Speransky military reform. Mikhail Speransky: biography, years of life, activities, photos. by the degree of constancy - stable and changing costs "

Mikhail Speransky's political views were outlined by him in 1809 in an extensive note, occupying the volume of a book, "Introduction to the Code of State Laws," where he presented a program of broad transformations.

While developing projects of reforms in Russia, Speransky turned to the political experience of European states, which showed that Europe was characterized by a transition from feudal to republican rule. Russia, according to Speransky, followed the same path with Western Europe.

At the head of the reform was a strict division of power into legislative, administrative and judicial, as well as the division of powers into local and central. The vertical and horizontal division of the entire state political mechanism created a consistent system, starting in volost institutions and ending with the highest government institutions of the empire. The lowest unit of management and self-government was the parish. The volost administration was divided into legislative bodies, courts and administrations, and the county, provincial and state administrations were also divided.

The central state administration consisted, according to Speransky, of three independent institutions: the State Duma (legislative branch), the Senate (judicial branch) and ministries (administrative branch). The activities of these three institutions were united in the Council of State and through it ascended to the throne.

The highest judicial institution of the empire was the Senate, which was divided into criminal and civil departments and had its seat in St. Petersburg and Moscow (two departments each). In the later edition, even four locations were assumed - Petersburg, Moscow, Kiev and Kazan. Senators were to hold office for life, and Senate meetings were planned to be public. All court cases must be subject to Senate review.

In 1809, Speransky in the judicial reform outlined in general terms what was partially implemented in the Russian Empire in the judicial statutes of 1864 - the separation of the peace mediation proceedings (volost judges) from the general formal, three courts of the general judicial system; trial by jury for first instance and partly for magistrates' court; independence of the court (either election or life); publicity.

The judicial hierarchy was supplemented by the Speransky Supreme Criminal Court, which is attached to the Senate and convened to judge state crimes, as well as crimes committed by ministers, members of the State Council, senators, and governors-general. The Supreme Criminal Court was composed of members of the State Council, the State Duma and the Senate.

The State Council, on Speransky's reforms, limited the decisions of the emperor. The emperor could not approve the opinions and decisions of the council, but their very formulation "heeding the opinion of the State Council" showed that replacing these opinions and decisions would not agree with the provision.

The State Council was given broad powers - consideration and approval of general internal measures (in the order of the executive), control over foreign policy, state budgets and reports of all ministries, powers in emergency cases. Members of the Council of State could attend the Supreme Criminal Court. The most important positions in the administrative and judicial hierarchy, if they were not elected, were replaced by ministers with the approval of the Council of State.

The proposals set forth by Mikhail Speransky looked very radical at that time, reflected Masonic ideas (Speransky, like many prominent personalities of the Russian Empire, was a member of the Masonic lodge).

At the beginning of 1810, the State Council was established, where Mikhail Speransky became Secretary of State. The council, as suggested by Speransky, was divided into four departments: 1) laws, 2) military affairs, 3) civil and spiritual affairs, and 4) state economy. Each department was represented by its own chairman. In the general meeting, the chairmanship belonged to the emperor or to a person by his annual appointment. To carry out the affairs of the council, a state office was established from secretaries of state under the main management of the secretary of state, who reported at the general meeting, presented the council's journals at the highest discretion and was in charge of the entire executive part. The post of state secretary, which Speransky held at that time, actually gave the powers of the second state person after the emperor.

Being himself one of the most important officials of the state, Speransky understood the importance of the bureaucratic army for future reforms and therefore strove to make it highly organized and efficient. In August 1809, a decree prepared by Speransky was published on new rules for the production of ranks in the civil service. From now on, the rank of collegiate assessor, which previously could be obtained by seniority, was given only to those officials who had in their hands a certificate of successful completion of a course in one of the Russian universities or passed exams under a special program. It included testing the knowledge of the Russian language, one of the foreign languages, natural, Roman, state and criminal law, general and Russian history, state economics, physics, geography and statistics of Russia. The rank of the collegiate assessor corresponded to the eighth grade of the "Table of Ranks". From this class and above, officials had great privileges, high salaries and the right of hereditary nobility.

In April 1809, a decree was issued that changed the order introduced during the reign of Catherine II, according to which nobles, even who were not in government service, received the title of chamber junker or chamberlain and certain privileges. Henceforth, these titles were to be regarded as simple distinctions that did not give any privileges. The privileges were received only by those who carried out the civil service. The decree was signed by the emperor, the authorship is attributed to Speransky.

On the initiative of Mikhail Speransky, in order to educate the enlightened elite of society in 1811, the Imperial Lyceum was created near St. Petersburg. Among the first lyceum students were Alexander Pushkin, Konstantin Danzas, Anton Delvig.

The upper strata of Russian society perceived Speransky's projects as too radical, and, ultimately, the reforms he proposed were not fully implemented.

Under the influence of personal circumstances at the very beginning of the 1800s, Speransky became interested in mysticism, which corresponded to the public mood. For ten years he studied the works of Theosophists and Church Fathers. Denying the Orthodox Church and preaching the internal church, he associated the reform of the church with the Christianization of public life on the basis of universal Christianity, which Alexander I partially tried to implement when creating the "Sacred Union".

(Additional

I decided with the help of a new round of reform activities. With the cooling of the tsar to the members of the Secret Committee, a need arose for new faces, who, however, had to continue the previous direction of reforms. The emperor quickly found a man who met these requirements. It was M. M. Speransky.

Mikhail Mikhailovich Speransky (1772-1839)came from the family of a poor rural priest. After graduating from the St. Petersburg Theological Academy, he worked for some time as a teacher and then as a secretary to Prince A.B. Kurakin, the favorite of Paul I. When the prince was appointed Prosecutor General of the Senate, Speransky began working as an official in the Senate under Kurakin. In a short time, he proved himself to be a truly irreplaceable and very capable person. At the beginning of the reign of Alexander I, he was among the main actors in the government, although he did not initially occupy major government posts.

The members of the Secret Committee involved Speransky in summarizing the materials of their discussions, and then began to entrust him with drafting projects on the topics set by them. In 1803-1807. Speransky already had the post of director of one of the departments of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. He was closest to V.P. Kochubei, the all-powerful Minister of Internal Affairs. During the minister's illness, Speransky was instructed to personally report to the emperor on the state of affairs in his place. These reports showed Alexander that Speransky is the person he needs. In addition, unlike the tsar's inner circle, Speransky did not oppose the Tilsit world, sympathizing in his soul with the laws established in France by Napoleon.

The ascent of Speransky to the heights of state power began. From 1807 he was the state secretary of the emperor, and from 1808 - the deputy minister of justice, who was also the prosecutor general of the Senate.

Political reform project: intentions and results.

Speransky proposed the first draft of political transformations to the tsar back in 1803 in his "Note on the Structure of Judicial and Government Institutions in Russia". He raised the question of the need to carefully introduce a constitutional monarchy in the country and thus prevent a "French revolutionary nightmare" for Russia. However, it was only after the Peace of Tilsit that the tsar instructed him to draft a comprehensive reform of public administration. Such a project was ready by October 1809.

It was the "Introduction to the Code of State Laws", which contained the following provisions:

The government should be governed by the separation of powers: legislative power belongs to the new elected institution;

The State Duma; executive power is exercised by ministries; judicial power belongs to the Senate;

Another new body - the State Council - was supposed to become an advisory body under the emperor and consider all draft laws before they were submitted to the Duma;

- established three main classes of Russian society:

1) nobility,

2) "average condition" (merchants, burghers, state peasants),

3) "working people" (serfs, domestic servants, workers);

Political rights were to belong to representatives of the "free" (first two) estates; however, the third estate received general civil rights (chief among them was the provision that "no one can be punished without a court sentence") and could, as property and capital accumulated, move to the second estate; the first estate also retained special rights (to buy estates with serfs, etc.);

Only persons who had movable and immovable property (ie, representatives of the first two estates) received the right to vote;

Elections to the State Duma were supposed to be four-stage (at first there were elections to volost councils, then the deputies of these bodies elected members of the district councils, those, in turn, - the deputies of the provincial councils. And only the provincial councils elected the deputies of the State Duma);

A chancellor appointed by the tsar was to lead the work of the Duma.

The implementation of Speransky's project was to be an important step on the path of reform. This plan would eventually develop in other transformations. The reformer saw the ultimate goal in limiting the autocratic power of the tsar and eliminating serfdom.

Alexander I generally approved Speransky's project. However, it should have been implemented gradually, without causing upheavals in society. With this in mind, the tsar decided first to set in motion the most "harmless" part of the reform.

On January 1, 1810, a manifesto was promulgated on the establishment of the Council of State. Its main task was to establish order in the preparation and adoption of laws. All their projects now had to be considered only through the Council of State. The council assessed not only the content of the laws, but also the very necessity of their adoption. Its tasks also included "clarification" of the meaning of laws, taking measures to implement them. In addition, the members of the Council had to consider the reports of the ministries and make proposals on the distribution of state revenues and expenditures.

The State Council was called upon to become not a legislative, but a legislative body under the emperor, an instrument of his legislative power.

In 1811 Speransky prepared a draft of the Code of the Governing Senate, which was to become the next step on the path of political reform. Based on the idea of \u200b\u200bseparation of powers, he proposed to divide the Senate into the Government (in charge of local government) and the Judicial (which is the highest court and controls all judicial institutions). This project, however, was never carried out.

Conducted in 1810 - 1811. transformations, as well as the desire to grant civil rights to serfs, caused such a storm of indignation among high officials and most of the nobles that Alexander was forced to stop implementing reforms: the fate of his father was too fresh in his memory.

Resignation of M. M. Speransky: causes and consequences.

Speransky, on behalf of the emperor, also developed projects of economic reforms. They provided for the limitation of government spending and some tax increases that affected the nobility. Opposition to reforms in these conditions began to be open. Such authoritative people as, for example, N.M. Karamzin, one of the ideologists of conservatism, joined the criticism of the government.

Alexander was well aware that Speransky's sharp criticism was essentially directed at his own address. Speransky was further accused of betrayal for his sympathy for the order in France, which he allegedly wanted to introduce in Russia to please Napoleon. The tsar could no longer restrain the wave of criticism and decided to resign Speransky. Not the least role here was played by the emperor's intention to unite society on the eve of the approaching war with Napoleon. In March 1812 Speransky was exiled to Nizhny Novgorod, and then to Perm.

Despite the fact that Speransky's reforms did not touch the foundations of the feudal-autocratic system, they were almost never implemented. At the same time, Speransky's reformist searches formed the basis on which new projects of transformations were further developed.

Introduction 2

1.Political situation in Russia 4

2. Brief biography of M.M. Speransky 5

3.M.M. Speransky 8

4. Reforms of M.М. Speransky 14

5. The reasons for the failure of the reforms M.M. Speransky 26

Conclusion 28

References 29

Introduction

Russia entered the 19th century with an absolute monarchy. The emperor stood at the head of the pyramid of power. He issued laws and supervised their implementation, was the supreme judge, and managed finances. However, the growth of elements of capitalist development, the decomposition of the feudal-serf system predetermined the reform of the power system. The most far-sighted politicians began to understand that the delay in economic development and the country's ever-growing lag behind the West did not contribute to the growth of its international influence and weaken the solution of many domestic problems. The need for modernization became more and more tangible.

This is exactly what Alexander I faced in his attempts to transform Russia. He ascended the throne in 1801 and did not dare to pursue a policy of absolutism straightforwardly. For the first time, Alexander's closest advisers were his young friends, who formed an "unspoken committee." The projects that they jointly developed did not lead to fundamental reforms. The matter was limited to only a few partial transformations that slightly renovated the facade of the Russian Empire. The members of the secret committee, one after another, began to move away from Alexander I, their vacant places were eventually taken by one person who became the only trusted employee of the emperor - this was Mikhail Mikhailovich Speransky.

Speransky was appointed assistant minister of justice and, together with the emperor, began to work on a general plan for state reforms.

Speransky was the best, most gifted representative of the old, spiritual and academic education. By the nature of this education, he was an ideologist or theorist, as they would call him in our time. He was capable of surprisingly correct political constructions, but it was hard for him then to understand reality. He drew such a plan, distinguished by an amazing harmony, consistency in the implementation of the accepted principles. But when this plan had to be implemented, neither the sovereign nor the minister could in any way adjust it to the level of the actual needs and cash resources of Russia.

The aim of the course work is to consider the main projects of reforms developed by M.M. Speransky and the reasons for their failures.

1.Political situation in Russia

The political system of Russia was in its form autocratic-bureaucratic. All sections of the population suffered from the arbitrariness of the bureaucracy, from its bribery. The situation began to gradually change with the coming to power of a new ruler.

On March 12, 1801, as a result of a palace coup, Alexander 1 (1801-1825) ascended the Russian throne. The first steps of the new emperor justified the hopes of the Russian nobility and indicated a break with the policy of the previous reign. Alexander, the successor to Emperor Paul, came to the throne with a broad program of reforms in Russia and carried it out more deliberately and more consistently than his predecessor. There were two main aspirations that have made up the content of Russia's domestic policy since the beginning of the 19th century:

it is the equalization of the estates before the law and their introduction into joint, friendly state activity. These were the main tasks of the era, but they were complicated by other aspirations, which were necessary preparation for their solution or inevitably flowed from their solution. The equalization of the estates before the law changed the very foundations of legislation. Thus, a need arose for codification in order to harmonize various laws, old and new.

The restructuring of the state order on a legal leveling basis demanded an increase in the educational level of the people, and yet the careful, partial implementation of this restructuring caused double discontent in society: some were dissatisfied with the destruction of the old; others were unhappy that new things were being introduced too slowly. The government saw the need to guide public opinion, restrain it, guide it, educate minds. Never before have censorship and public education been included so closely in the general reforming plans of the government as in the past century. Finally, a series of wars and internal reforms, changing together with the external, international position of the state and the internal, social structure of society, shook the state economy, upset finances, forced the payment forces of the people to be strained and improved state improvement, lowered the people's well-being.

The main issues of that time were: socio-political, which consisted in the establishment of new relations between social classes, in the structure of society and management with the participation of society; a codification question, which consisted in the streamlining of new legislation, a pedagogical question, which consisted in the leadership, direction and education of minds, and a financial question, which consisted in the new structure of the state economy.

2. Brief biography of M.M. Speransky

Mikhail Mikhailovich Speransky was born in 1772 in the Vladimir province in the village of Cherkutino. His father was a priest in a village church.

Speransky left his parental home at the age of eight. Around 1780 he was assigned to the Vladimir diocesan seminary. According to the established tradition, the son of a priest was to continue his father's work.

In the mid-80s of the 18th century. in the Vladimir Seminary, there were orders that largely reflected the public mores of the end of the reign of Catherine II. In the summer of 1788, the Vladimir Seminary was merged with the Suzdal and Pereyaslav Seminaries into one educational institution located in Suzdal.

The program of the new educational institution was drawn up taking into account the rationalistic and philosophical spirit of the time. It provided for the study of both traditional seminary disciplines - theology, metaphysics, rhetoric, and secular disciplines - mathematics, history, Greek. The seminary had the richest library, which contained the works of many Western European thinkers in originals. By the decision of the Synod, the best students of provincial seminaries from all over Russia were sent to the Alexander Nevsky Seminary. Among them, Mikhail Mikhailovich Speransky, who arrived in the capital, was honored to be included.

Graduates of the Alexander Nevsky Seminary were to return as teachers to the seminaries from which they were sent. M. Speransky was offered an offer to stay to work in St. Petersburg. In the spring of 1792 he was appointed to the position of teacher of mathematics at the "main seminary" in Russia. In 1796, in search of additional earnings, Speransky got a job as a personal secretary to Prosecutor General A.B. Kurakin and for some time began to combine teaching with work for the prince. At the end of December 1796 he stopped teaching and became a Russian official.

Speransky's ascent up the career ladder was rapid. Three months after his entry into the civil service, he received the rank of collegiate assessor, nine months later, on January 1, 1798, he was appointed court counselor. Twenty and a half months later, in September 1799, he became a collegiate counselor. Less than three months later he became a state councilor. And already on July 9, 1801 - Speransky became a real state councilor. In just four and a half years, he became a prominent dignitary of the Russian Empire.

In March 1801 Speransky received a new appointment. He was Secretary of State under Dmitry Troshchinsky, who served as Secretary of State under Alexander I. Thus, Mikhail Mikhailovich found himself in the circle of persons who largely determined the policy of the state. Troshchinsky was supposed to submit reports to the emperor and edit the papers coming from him. Troshchinsky began to entrust Speransky with drawing up manifestos and decrees, of which there were a great many in the first years of the reign of Alexander I.

The abilities of D.P. Troshchinsky's assistant attracted the attention of members of the Secret Committee. In the summer of 1801, V.P. Kochubei took Speransky into his "team". At this time, the Secret Committee was working on transforming the colleges created by Peter the Great into ministries. In June 1802, Speransky headed a department in the Ministry of Internal Affairs, which was ordered to prepare projects of state reforms.

The time of M. M. Speransky's work in the Ministry of Internal Affairs, which fell on 1802-1807, was a relatively quiet period of his life.

In 1806, Speransky became personally acquainted with Alexander I. The emperor began to draw him closer to him, entrusting him with "private affairs". In the fall of 1807, he was instructed to accompany Alexander I to Vitebsk for a military inspection, and a year later, to Erfurt for a meeting with Napoleon.

Alexander I appointed Speransky as a comrade (that is, deputy) minister of justice and at the same time made him the chief adviser in state affairs.

The reform plan in the form of an extensive document "Introduction to the Code of State Laws" was a statement of the thoughts, ideas and intentions of not only the reformer, but also the sovereign himself. Speransky began to determine the domestic and foreign policy of the state.

In January 1810, with the establishment of the State Council, Speransky became Secretary of State, the most influential dignitary in Russia, the second person after the emperor in the state.

3.M.M. Speransky

The views of the reformer M.M. Speransky are reflected in a note of 1809 - "Introduction to the Code of State Laws." In it, he expressed his opinion on the specific problems of state development and the rule of law, but also further explained and substantiated his thoughts on the basis of the theory of law, or even rather the philosophy of law.

Speransky points out that the living forces of the state can manifest themselves either in a concentrated form, or separately, being distributed among individuals. Speransky writes: "If the rights of state power were unlimited, if the state forces were united in sovereign power and they would not leave any rights to their subjects, then the state would be in slavery and the government would be despotic." According to Speransky, such slavery can take two forms:

The first form excludes subjects not only from any participation in the use of state power, but also deprives them of the freedom to dispose of their own person and their property. The second excludes subjects from participation in government, but leaves them free in relation to their own personality and property. In a milder form, subjects do not have political rights, but they retain civil rights. And their presence means that there is freedom in the state. But this freedom is not sufficiently guaranteed and can be easily violated by the state power, therefore, Speransky explains, it is necessary to protect it by means of creating and strengthening the basic law, that is, the Political Constitution. Civil rights should be listed in it “in the form of initial civil consequences arising from political rights,” and citizens should be given political rights by which they will be able to defend their civil rights and their civil liberty.

Civil rights and freedoms are insufficiently secured by laws and law. Without constitutional guarantees, they themselves are powerless. Therefore, it was the demand to strengthen the civil system that formed the basis of Speransky's entire plan of state reforms and determined their main idea - "rule, hitherto autocratic, to establish and establish by law." Speransky considered it necessary to issue basic laws that would guarantee civil liberty. The idea is that state power must be built on a permanent basis, and the government must be on a solid constitutional and legal basis, and thus its power must be set precise limits, and its activity must proceed strictly within the prescribed framework of the law. This idea stems from a tendency to find in the fundamental laws of the state a solid foundation for civil rights and freedoms. It carries within itself the desire to ensure the connection of the civil system with the basic laws and to firmly establish it, precisely based on these laws.

Speransky, in his reform program, also speaks of the creation of a state governed by the rule of law, which should ultimately be a constitutional state. He explains that the security of a person and property is the first inalienable property of any society, since inviolability is the essence of civil rights and freedoms, which have two types: personal and material freedoms.

1. No one can be punished without trial;

2. No one is obliged to perform personal service except by law.

Speransky everywhere perceives the law as a method of protecting security and freedom. The reformer approaches the requirement of a constitutional and legal limitation of power, so that the government, in carrying out its functions, takes into account the existing law.

Speransky considers it necessary to have a system of separation of powers. Here he fully accepts the ideas that prevailed in Western Europe at that time and writes in his work that: "You cannot establish government on the law, if one sovereign power will make up the law and execute it." Therefore, Speransky sees a reasonable structure of state power in its division into three branches: legislative, executive and judicial, while maintaining the autocratic form.

Since the discussion of draft laws involves the participation of a large number of people, it is necessary to create special bodies representing the legislative branch - the Duma. They should be composed of elected representatives. But the right to elect them cannot belong equally to everyone. Speransky stipulates that the purpose of laws is to protect individuals and property. Consequently, the more property a person has, the more he is interested in protecting property rights. And from this it is concluded that only people with property are more concerned with "the soundness of laws" and can judge them. Therefore, those who have neither real estate nor capital are excluded from the election process. This rule must be especially observed, Speransky emphasized, because there are always more have-nots than haves, and they can easily gain an advantage in the assembly, and therefore gain the greatest influence on the legislative process. The democratic approach of elections is alien to Speransky, and in contrast to this he puts forward and attaches greater importance to the liberal principle of the separation of powers. At the same time, Speransky recommends widespread decentralization, that is, along with the central State Duma, local councils should also be created: volost, uyezd and provincial. According to the draft, it was assumed that the volost duma would be composed of land owners of the volost and deputies from state peasants (one from 500 people). It is called upon to solve local issues, as well as to elect the volost government and deputies to the county council. In turn, the members of the county duma deal with the affairs of their district and elect the county government and the deputies of the provincial duma. The latter should elect deputies from among its members for the highest representative body - the State Duma. Thus, it would be formed as a result of three-stage elections.

The main goal of the State Duma was to discuss and adopt the budget and draft laws proposed by the government. Without the consent of the State Duma, the autocrat had no right to issue laws, except for those cases when it came to saving the fatherland. However, in contrast, the emperor could always dissolve the deputies and call new elections. Consequently, by its existence, the State Duma, as it were, was called upon to give only an idea of \u200b\u200bthe needs of the people and to exercise control over the executive power.

Executive power, in turn, at Speransky is represented by boards - volost, district and provincial, and at the highest level - by ministries, which were formed by the emperor himself. Moreover, the ministers, as already noted, were to be held accountable to the State Duma, which was empowered to ask for the abolition of illegal acts, as well as to organize investigation procedures in order to expose the ministers of abuse of office. This is Speransky's fundamentally new approach, expressed in the desire to place officials, both in the center and in the localities, under the control of public opinion.

The judicial branch of government in the reform project was represented by regional, county and provincial courts, consisting of elected judges and acting with the participation of a jury. The highest court was the Senate, whose members were elected for life by the State Duma and personally approved by the emperor.

Since each of the three branches in the system of power should have had some independence in relation to the others, the unity of state power, according to Speransky's project, would be embodied only in the personality of the monarch. It would be ensured that the monarch, as the bearer of state sovereignty, remained the only representative of all branches of government, heading them. Speransky believed that it was necessary to create an institution that would take care of planned cooperation between individual authorities and would be, as it were, a concrete expression of the fundamental embodiment of state unity in the personality of the monarch. According to his plan, such an institution was to become the State Council, which is an advisory body of dignitaries appointed by the monarch. In his activities, he combined all the legislative, executive and judicial powers, coordinating and adjusting their interaction. At meetings of the council, it was planned to discuss all major state events, legislative proposals and financial problems before their introduction to the State Duma. At the same time, the State Council was supposed to act as the guardian of the implementation of legislation in all areas of government, and through it it was planned to receive all cases from the lower bodies to the sovereign, which would allow achieving unity in the work of the government.

Thus, in the program of his reforms, Speransky not only developed but also laid down a certain system of checks and balances in the activities of the highest state bodies under the rule of the emperor. He argued that already on the basis of this, the very direction of reforms is set and it can only be a question of arranging new state institutions in such an order in which they gradually and more and more would take on the character of genuine constitutional institutions within the autocratic state form.

Speransky considered Russia mature enough to begin reforms and obtain a constitution that would ensure not only civil, but also political freedom.

Speransky argues that there are no examples in history that an enlightened commercial people remained in a state of slavery for a long time and that shocks cannot be avoided if the state structure does not correspond to the spirit of the times. Therefore, heads of state must closely monitor the development of the public spirit and adapt political systems to it. From this, Speransky drew the conclusion that it would be a great advantage - the emergence of a constitution in Russia thanks to the "beneficent inspiration of the supreme power."

But the supreme power in the person of the emperor did not share all the points of Speransky's program. Alexander I was quite satisfied with only partial transformations of feudal Russia, spiced with liberal promises and abstract discourses about law and freedom. At the same time, the drafted plan of reforms by Speransky was close to the sovereign, since he revealed some of his ideas in more detail and deeply and did not question the existence of the autocratic system, but only proposed to clothe it with all the so-called forms of law. These external forms included elementary legality, the election of some officials and their responsibility, the creation of new principles for organizing court and control, the separation of powers, etc. etc. Alexander I was ready to accept all this. But he also experienced the strongest pressure from the court environment, including members of his family, who sought to prevent radical transformations in Russia. As a result, the resulting reform plan turned out to be somewhat abstract and "premature". According to the figurative expression of V.O. Klyuchevsky: "neither the sovereign nor the minister could in any way adjust him to the level of the real needs and available funds of the country." It was a kind of political dream of the two best and brightest minds of Russia, a dream - the realization of which could contribute to the beginning of the constitutional process in the empire, a faster evolution from an absolute monarchy towards a bourgeois monarchy.

4. Reforms of M.М. Speransky

Transformation of the Council of State

Speransky suggested starting the planned reform with the transformation of the State Council. In 1810 the Secret Council (operated from 1801 to 1810) was abolished, and on January 1, 1810 the State Council became the supreme legislative body. Basically, this institution is still operating today. Its significance in the management system is expressed in the Manifesto of January 1 by the definition that in it "all parts of government in their main relation to legislation are aligned and through it ascend to the supreme power."

This means that the state council discusses all the details of the state structure, as far as they require new laws, and presents its considerations to the discretion of the supreme power.

The Council of State is not a legislative power, but only an instrument, and, moreover, the only one that collects legislative issues in all parts of government, discusses them and submits its conclusions to the discretion of the supreme power. Thus, a firm legal order is established.

In this sense, Speransky defines the significance of the Council in his reply to the sovereign about the activities of the institution in 1810, saying that the Council was "established in order to give the legislative power, hitherto scattered and scattered, to give a new outline of constancy and uniformity."

The new institution is characterized by the following features: 1) the Council considers new laws in all branches of government; 2) he considers them alone; 3) not a single law, considered by him, is transferred for execution without the approval of the supreme authority. These features indicate the double meaning of the Council: it, firstly, discusses legislative issues raised in all branches of government; secondly, by decisions approved by the supreme power, it unites the activities of all these industries. The value of the Council, legislative, unifying, and the leadership of all parts of government, is expressed not in overseeing the details of government and the implementation of laws, which is the business of the Senate, but in consideration of general conditions that ensure the correct implementation of laws; therefore, the State Council belongs to the explanation of the true meaning of laws, the adoption of general measures for their successful operation, the distribution of state revenues and expenditures, the consideration of reports of all ministries on the management of the parts entrusted to them.

All these features make the organization of the Council of State a rather peculiar phenomenon in state law. The device given to it corresponds to this meaning of the Council. The Council is chaired by the sovereign himself, who also appoints 35 members of the Council. The council consisted of a general meeting and four departments - legislative, military affairs, civil and spiritual affairs and state economy.

For the administration of the Council's office work, a State Chancellery was established under it with a special section for each department. The affairs of each individual department are reported by the state secretary in his department, and the secretary of state is in charge of the entire office, reporting matters to the general meeting and presenting the journal of the Council at the highest discretion.

Speransky, the main organizer of the institution, was appointed secretary of state, which given the news of the case gave him the importance of head of the entire Council. The State Council was approved in order to "give the legislative power, hitherto scattered, to give the first outline of correctness, constancy and uniformity."

General institution of ministries

Since 1811, an important legislative act came into force, defining the basic principles of the organizational structure of ministers and the procedure for their activity - "General institution of ministries". The adoption of this document completed the ministerial reform of 1802.

Speransky found a double flaw in these ministries: the lack of a precise definition of the responsibility of ministers and the incorrect distribution of affairs between ministries. They were transformed by two acts - the manifesto on July 12, 1810 on the division of state affairs into special administrations and the "General approval of the ministries" on June 25, 1811.

Under the new procedure, one of the eight previous ministries, namely commerce, was abolished, the affairs of which were distributed between the ministries of finance and the interior; but from the jurisdiction of the latter were separated cases of internal security, for which a special ministry of police was formed.

In addition, several special departments were established under the name of "main departments" with the meaning of individual ministries: "the main department for the audit of state accounts" (or state control), "the main department of spiritual affairs of foreign confessions" and, in 1809, the "main department of railways messages ".

Thus, individual central departments, among which the cases are distributed in the order of the executive, i.e. administrative, there were eleven instead of the previous eight.

In the "General Institutions" the composition and office work of the ministries, the limits of power of the ministries, their responsibility and other details of the ministerial administration were determined.

Both acts, which transformed the ministries and special main departments, in terms of the harmony of the plan, the logical sequence of its development, the originality and accuracy of presentation, are still recognized as exemplary works of our legislation, which the author himself was proud of, not without reason, and the administrative order established by him, even in detail, it continues to operate.

The reform carried out established the principle of direct responsibility of the minister to the emperor. The inner side of the ministries was transformed. The ministries acted as strictly executing institutions.

Draft of the Governing and Judicial Senates

The Senate was also supposed to be transformed. The transformation project was prepared by the beginning of 1811 and submitted to the State Council in June.

Presenting the draft to the State Council, Speransky prefaced it with an extensive introduction, in which he argued in detail that the Senate could not be a "legislative estate." The introduction eloquently proves that, according to the author of the reform, the State Duma, not the Senate, should be the legislative, highest political institution. With the Senate reform, Speransky wanted to prepare the way for the Duma.

This project was based on a strict separation of administrative and judicial affairs, which were mixed in the previous structure of the Senate.

According to this, the Senate was supposed to be transformed into two special institutions, of which one, called by the Senate ruling and concentrating government affairs, was to consist of ministers with their comrades and chiefs of special (main) parts of administration, this is the former committee of ministers; the other, called the Senate Judicial, split into four local branches, which are located in the four main judicial districts of the empire: in St. Petersburg, Moscow, Kiev and Kazan. The Governing Senate was supposed to have three categories of cases:

not subject to any of the ministers (promulgation of laws);

cases in accordance with the legislation belonging only to the Senate (conclusion of contracts and placement of contracts for "important" amounts assigned to responsible positions;

cases to be reported to the emperor.

The Judicial Senate should be the highest court and be formed from senators appointed from the crown and elected nobles, and both should be equally divided. The decisions were supposed to be final and not subject to appeal. He pointed out that at the time of the reform, the legal procedure in Russia consisted of seven instances and, despite this, complaints about "injustice" were heard everywhere.

This project was strongly opposed by the State Council; most of all attacked the right of elections by the nobility of members of the Senate, seeing in this a limitation of autocratic power.

Despite the fact that during the casting of votes, most of the members of the Council supported the project and the sovereign approved the opinion of the majority, but various obstacles, external and internal, prevented the implementation of the new reform, and Speransky himself advised to postpone it. Thanks to this, the Senate retained the previous confusion of departments, introducing some disorder into the general warehouse of the central government. Of the three branches of top management — legislative, executive, and judicial — only the first two have been transformed; the third was not affected by the reform.

Financial transformation

The various activities of Speransky included the organization of finances, which were in a sad state due to wars and trade difficulties caused by the continental system. According to the estimate of 1810, all the banknotes issued in circulation were 577 million; external debt - 100 million. The income estimate for 1810 promised an amount of 127 million in banknotes, the cost estimate required an amount of 193 million, a deficit of 66 million, which amounted to more than half of the total amount of state revenues. Speransky wanted to eliminate that situation with his broad plan of financial reforms.

In November 1809, Alexander called on Speransky to solve financial problems. He commanded him to "draw up a definite and firm financial plan."

In order to lift Russia out of a catastrophic situation, the plan required "strong measures and important donations." These measures were reduced to: 1) the withdrawal from circulation of banknotes and the formation of capital for their redemption; 2) reducing the costs of all government departments; 3) establishing tight control over public spending; 4) the device of the coin system; 5) development of trade, both internal and external; 6) the establishment of taxes.

First of all, Speransky managed to implement that part of the project that involved cost cutting. The expenditure side of the 1810 budget was reduced by 20 million rubles. The revenues received by all departments were declared to belong to the state treasury, and these sums could be spent only with the permission of the Minister of Finance with subsequent approval by the State Council.

The state has expanded direct loans from the population by raising the interest rate on government bonds. In the loan, Speransky saw the most powerful driving force of the economy, in the loan based on commercial principles and, of course, repayable. Enterprises were allowed to lend their free funds to each other.

An important measure to stabilize the financial condition was the establishment of taxes on noble estates, previously exempted from taxes. The nobles would not forgive Speransky for this act later.

Finally, Speransky took up the position of a bargaining chip. The silver ruble was adopted as the main coinage. Measures were taken to increase the amount of small silver coins, which the reformer proposed to replace the copper one. Thus, he tried to restore confidence in banknotes, facilitating their exchange for coins.

Speransky developed a customs tariff and a trade code. They were based on the idea of \u200b\u200b"encouraging as much as possible the production of domestic labor in industry", reducing the flow of foreign goods and facilitating their export from Russia. These tariffs helped to withstand the Russian industry during the difficult years of the continental blockade.

Speransky's tariff played a very important role in the fight against the trade expansion of France, when, for the first time in the history of Russia, a number of French goods were imposed with a solid duty.

Much later, Speransky prepared a detailed note "On Monetary Circulation". It provides a critical analysis of the financial policy of the autocracy and defines measures for its improvement. Among them: 1) the establishment of bank notes; 2) determination of the general rate and acceptance at this rate of credit tickets instead of banknotes in all banks without exception; 3) transfer of banknotes to bank notes. “The consequence of the first measure,” wrote Speransky, “will be to suspend the further rise of banknotes. The consequence of the second will be to bring their courses into one general and thereby stop the common people crap. Finally, the consequences of the third measure are a radical correction of our entire monetary movement. "

By the laws of February 2, 1810 and February 11, 1812, all taxes were increased - or doubled, others more than doubled. So, the price of a pood of salt from 40 kopecks. rose to the ruble; per capita serve from 1 rub. was raised to 3 rubles. It is curious that this plan also included a new, previously unheard of tax - "progressive income". They were taxed on the income of landlords from their lands. The lowest tax was levied on 500 rubles. income and amounted to 1% of the latter; the highest tax fell on estates that gave more than 18 thousand rubles. income, and accounted for 10% of the latter.

The increase in taxes was the main reason for the popular murmur against Speransky, which his enemies from high society managed to take advantage of. All conservatives united against him, among whom A.A. Arakcheev. Speransky was surrounded by volunteer spies who passed his every careless word to the king. He was accused of espionage for Napoleon, arrested and exiled to Nizhny Novgorod. Until 1821 he was removed from big politics and returned to it as a completely different person, considering his activities erroneous and claiming that Russia was not ripe for change. By this time M.M. Speransky abandoned his constitutional projects and became the defender of an unlimited monarchy.

The result of the reform was the reduction of the state budget deficit to 6 million rubles. (in 1809 it was 105 million rubles), income increased to 300 million rubles. The Russian budget was discussed by the State Council and the Ministry of Finance. Control over the budget is established, arbitrariness in financial affairs is eliminated. There was an order in the expenses.

Decree on court titles

On April 3, 1809, a decree on the titles of the court was issued. The titles of chamberlain and chamber junker were not combined with definite and permanent official duties, but they gave important advantages. By decree, it was presented to everyone who bore this title, but who was not in any service, military or civil, to enter such service within two months, declaring which department they want to serve; the title itself turns from now on into a simple one, not connected with any official rights.

All officials had to have appropriate education. The decree of August 6, 1809 established the procedure for the production of a collegiate assessor (8th grade) and state councilor (5th grade) for the civil ranks. These ranks were acquired not only by merit, but also by length of service, i.e. the established service life; the new decree banned the promotion to these ranks of employees who did not have a certificate of completion of the course in one of the Russian universities or did not pass the exam at the university according to the established program, which was attached to the decree.

Under this program, those wishing to receive the rank of collegiate assessor or state councilor were required to know the Russian language and one of the foreign languages, knowledge of the rights of natural, Roman and civil, state economy and criminal laws, thorough acquaintance with national history and basic information in the history of general, in the statistics of the Russian states, in geography, even in mathematics and physics.

Both decrees caused the greater commotion in the court society and the bureaucratic environment that they were issued quite unexpectedly. They were worked out and compiled by Speransky secretly from the highest government spheres.

The decrees clearly and firmly expressed the requirements with which employees in government agencies must satisfy; The law demanded that performers "experienced and gradual passage through the service, prepared, not entertained by momentary motives", in the words of the decree of April 3, - "well-versed performers with a solid and domestic education", i.e. educated in the national spirit, elevated not by seniority, but by "real merit and excellent knowledge," as the decree on August 6 says.

Indeed, new businessmen were required to act in the spirit of those principles that they tried to carry out in government institutions opened in 1810. These institutions were called "new educational institutions of the old institutions" that arose in the early years of the reign. However, the beginnings and forms introduced into the administration of these "new entities" were so new for Russia that the transformation gave the government metam the nature of the new institutions.

Codification work of M.M. Speransky

The codification work was entrusted to Rosenkampf, but in 1808, Deputy Minister of Justice M.M.Speransky joined the commission. She began by transforming the commission, which was divided into a council, a board and a group of legal advisers. MM Speransky became the secretary of the board. From 1810 he became the director of the commission.

The first stage of the cumbersome systematization, according to Speransky's plan, was to be the "Complete Collection of Laws." The legal technique for compiling the Code was based on the following method:

a) the articles of the "Code", based on one decree in force, should be expressed in the same words that are contained in the text and without changes;

b) articles based on several decrees shall be expressed in the words of the main decree with additions and explanations from other decrees;

d) shorten polysyllabic texts of laws and texts of laws;

e) choose the best or the latest from the conflicting laws.

As a result, by the beginning of 1830, 45 extensive volumes were created, containing about 42 thousand articles. The Code of Laws was supposed to consist of eight sections:

1. Basic state laws;

2. Institutions:

a) central;

b) local;

c) the charter of the civil service;

3. Laws of government forces:

a) the charter on duties;

b) the charter on taxes and duties;

c) customs charter;

d) monetary, mining and salt regulations;

e) statutes of forestry, quitrent articles and counting;

State laws;

Civil and boundary laws;

State improvement charters:

a) charters of spiritual affairs of foreign confessions, credit, commercial, industrial;

b) statutes of communications, postal, telegraphic, construction, provisions on mutual fire insurance, on agriculture, on hiring for rural work, on taverns, on improvement in Cossack villages, on colonies of foreigners on the territory of the empire;

Deanery Charters:

a) statutes on national foodstuffs, on public welfare, medical;

b) charters about passports, about fugitives, censorship, about the prevention and suppression of crimes, about those in custody, about exiles;

Criminal laws.

The codification work was carried out as follows:

Registers of all legalizations were collected from the state senate and collegiate archives, a single register was compiled on their basis, and only after that they turned to the primary sources. 3000 books containing Senate minutes were reviewed, the most important decrees were checked against the originals. However, the collection of legalizations was not intended to be used for practical purposes. Thus, in the first "Complete Collection of Laws" were placed more than 30 thousand different decrees, regulations, decisions, starting with the "Cathedral Code" and up to the accession to the throne of Nicholas I. The indisputable merit of this collection for that time was, first of all, that that in many parts it was not an abstract work. The "Code" included many principles worked out and tested by life. Laws previously known mainly to only a few lawyers have become available to many. Extensive scientific, critical, historical and other works related to the richest material contained in the "Complete Collection of Laws" and in the "Code of Laws" significantly contributed to the revival of legal thought and, undoubtedly, paved the way for the creation of the Code of Laws in the future. On January 19, 1833, a meeting of the State Council was held to discuss the submitted Code of Laws. It was decided to use the texts of existing laws until January 1, 1835, and then had to enter into force in full as a general "Code of Laws of the Russian Empire."

In general, this attempt to codify Russian law can be considered successful, in many respects this is the merit of the greatest Russian reformer M.M. Speransky.

5. The reasons for the failure of the reforms M.M. Speransky

The reason for the failure of Speransky's transformative undertakings was inconsistency. New government institutions, implemented or only conceived, were based on the beginning of legality, that is, on the idea of \u200b\u200ba firm and uniform law for all, which was supposed to restrict arbitrariness in all spheres of state and public life, in government, as well as in society. But according to the tacit or public recognition of the current law, a whole half of the empire's population, which was then considered over 40 million of the total sex, a whole half of this population depended not on the law, but on the personal arbitrariness of the owner; consequently, private civil relations were not consistent with the foundations of the new government institutions that were introduced and contrived. The new state institutions had to stand on the ready ground for a new coordinated civil relations, as a consequence grows out of their causes. The emperor and his employees decided to introduce new state institutions before the civil relations agreed with them were created, they wanted to build a liberal constitution in a society half of which was in slavery, that is, they hoped to achieve consequences before the causes that produced them.

Conclusion

The place of Speransky in the history of transformations of the national statehood and the formation of government legislative policy are generally recognized.

It was Speransky who stood at the origins of the creation of ministries in Russia, which are still the core of the executive branch. He also created the State Council and the State Duma project. At the same time, his plan for a radical transformation of Russian statehood was implemented only to a small extent, nevertheless, he paved the way for the subsequent streamlining of the judicial and legislative system.

For the first time in Russian history, Speransky succeeded in codifying Russian legislation - under his leadership the “Complete Collection of Laws” (56 volumes) and “Code of Laws of the Russian Empire” (15 volumes) were created. Speransky's worldview was based on the desire to establish the rule of law in Russia, as opposed to the customary rule of arbitrary power, even if formally clothed in the form of "law."

MM Speransky is undoubtedly one of the most remarkable people in Russia. He owes the great merit that he wanted to give his country a Constitution, free people, free peasants, a complete system of elective institutions and courts, a magistrate court, a code of laws, orderly finances, thus anticipating, for more than half a century, the great reforms of Alexander II and dreaming for Russia of successes that it could not achieve for a long time. "

Indeed, the full implementation of his projects would undoubtedly accelerate the evolution of Russia towards a landlord-bourgeois monarchy.

List of references

Derevianko A.P., Shabelnikova N.A. History of Russia from ancient times to the end of the 20th century. - M .: Law and Law, 2001, 253p.

Zuev M.N. History of Russia from ancient times to the end of the 20th century: a tutorial. M .: Bustard, 2001, 211s.

Isaev I.A. "History of State and Law of Russia" - a complete course of lectures, - M .: Jurist, 1994,157s.

History of Russia from ancient times to the beginning of the 20th century. History textbook for universities. Ed. Froyanova I. Ya. M., 1994, 177s.

Klyuchevsky V.O. Russian history course. M., 1993, 222s.

Klyuchevsky V.O. Russian history. - M .: Mysl, 1999, 156s

Orlov A.S. History of Russia from ancient times to the present day: textbook. M., 2000, 189s.

Platonov S.F. A course of lectures on Russian history. M., 1997.

Speransky M.M. Review of historical information about the code of laws (from 1700 to 1826). - SPb., 1833.

Speransky M.M. Projects and notes. - M. - L .: Publishing house of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 1961.

Speransky M.M. A guide to understanding the laws. - SPb., 1845.

Tomsinov V.A. The luminary of the Russian bureaucracy: Historical portrait of M.M. Speransky. - M .: Young Guard, 1991.

Chibiryaev S.A. The great Russian reformers: life, work, political views of M.M. Speransky. - M .: Sunday, 1993.

Chibiryaev S.A. Great Russian reformer. Moscow: Nauka, 1989, 141s.

Speransky. M, 1905. Speransky M.M. projects and notes. M; L., 1961 Speransky M.M. State transformation plan ...

The process of state reforms in Russia, which began at the beginning of the 18th century, was interrupted after the country entered the war with France in 1805-1807. This war ended with the Peace of Tilsit, which was disadvantageous for Russia, because of which the emperor's prestige was undermined. Therefore, in order to restore his authority, Emperor Alexander I decided to continue the initiated reforms to improve the state structure.

The development of reforms was proposed to the Deputy Minister of Justice M. M. Speransky.

The essence of the reforms of M.M. Speransky

Speransky was a good and executive civil servant, distinguished by outstanding abilities and diligence, he himself made his way to the upper strata of the Russian bureaucracy.

In 1809 Speransky presented a draft of fundamental state changes - "Introduction to the Code of State Laws."

The goal of the reform was two main provisions:

• replacement of autocratic rule by constitutional one;
• abolition of serfdom.

The reform project proposed by Speransky reflected bourgeois-liberal principles:

• separation of powers into legislative, executive and judicial;
• people's representation;
• elective beginning.

According to the draft, the State Duma should be the highest legislative body, the Senate - a judicial body, and the Committee of Ministers - an executive body.

The following followed from Speransky's reform project:

1. The State Duma was supposed to express the "opinion of the people", but the initiative to adopt new laws remained in the hands of the emperor and his bureaucracy.
2. The emperor retained his political and administrative powers.
3. The nobles and the middle class (merchants, petty bourgeois, state peasants who had real estate) should be granted suffrage.
4. Civil rights were designated. For example, no one could be punished without a court sentence.
5. It was proposed to create a State Council to consider laws and coordinate the activities of higher state institutions.

The emperor approved the submitted reform project, calling it "Satisfactory and helpful." But the emperor's associates opposed the project, seeing in it "Encroachment on the sacred foundations of Russian statehood".

Of the reforms proposed by Speransky, only those concerning the creation of the State Council and the completion of the ministerial reform were approved and implemented.

In 1810, the supreme legislative body was created - the State Council. The main task of the new body was to bring the legal system to general uniformity. The Secretary of State was in charge of the Chancellery of the Council of State and was in charge of all day-to-day business.
MM Speransky was appointed the first secretary of state.

In 1811, Speransky introduced a new bill, the General Establishment of Ministries, which completed the ministerial reform. According to the bill, the number of ministers increased to 12 people, their limits of responsibility were divided, the structure was determined, etc.

In 1809, the publishing house of the Decree on Court Ranks took place. This decree determined the following:

1. Service at court has no privileges.
2. Those who have court ranks must enter the military or civilian service.
3. Officials must have the appropriate education, be sure to know the basic disciplines: law, history, foreign language, statistics, mathematics.

So, M.M.Speransky had many enemies who called his transformations criminal... Therefore, M. M. Speransky was forced to resign in March 1812. He was removed from government until 1816 and exiled to Perm.

In 1816 he was returned to government service and was awarded the rank of governor of Penza, in 1819 he became the governor-general of Siberia.

In 1821, the emperor invited M.M.Speransky to St. Petersburg, indicating that his resignation was Victimized, to which he had to go in order to reduce the growth of discontent among the majority of the nobles who opposed any change.

It is important to note that under Alexander I the following reforms were attempted:

1. 1815 - introduction of the constitution in the Kingdom of Poland.
2. 1809 - as a result of the annexation of Finland to Russia, the emperor preserved the diet and the constitutional structure of Finland.
3. 1819 - 1820 - creation by NN Novosiltsev of the "Charter of the Russian Empire". According to the charter, power was divided into legislative, executive and judicial, the principle of equality of citizens before the law and the federal principle of public administration were introduced. It is important to note that this project was not adopted and remained only on paper.
4. 1808-1810 - A.A. Arakcheeva.

The main provisions of A.A. Arakcheeva

A.A. Arakcheev was a war minister who enjoyed the confidence of Alexander I. In 1808, he began reforms in the army. A.A. Arakcheev was characterized as an honest and loyal military man, who was distinguished by ruthlessness in his performance (his motto was as follows: "Betrayed without flattery").

Arakcheev carried out the following reforms:

• reforming artillery;
• order in the army;
• made the military mobile.

After the war with Napoleon in 1812, Arakcheev's influence on the emperor increased significantly. He subordinated the State Council, the Committee of Ministers, and His Imperial Majesty's own Chancellery.

It is with the activities of Arakcheev that a number of serious transformations are associated, including the peasant reform (1816-1819). The reform was carried out in the Baltic States and was reflected in two draft laws - the "Regulations on Estonian peasants" and "Regulations on Livonian peasants".

According to the reform, the peasants received personal freedom, but without land, because land was recognized as landlord property. The peasants were also given the right to own land on a lease basis with the subsequent possibility of redemption. When Arakcheev drafted this reform, he was guided by the decree of the emperor
"Do not embarrass the landlords, do not use violent measures against them."

If you notice an error in the text, please select it and press Ctrl + Enter

Mikhail Mikhailovich Speransky is an outstanding personality in Russian history. Speransky was the initiator of many reforms that were of great importance for the historical development of Russia.

Mikhail was born on January 1, 1772. His family was the most ordinary, his father was a priest. The boy grew up in an atmosphere of religiosity. Its origin seemed to prophesy the most ordinary fate for Speransky, but ...

He was a talented man, generously gifted by nature. At the age of seven, he began his studies at the theological seminary in Vladimir.

During his studies, he showed a great craving for books, he loved to think and reflect. It was during these years that his character was formed.

Mikhail was firm and stubborn, while he was characterized by good nature and modesty, while his main distinguishing feature was the ability to get along well with others.

For his excellent studies he was transferred to the Alexander Nevsky Seminary in St. Petersburg. Here he gets acquainted with the philosophical works of various European thinkers.

In 1792 he finished his studies, but remained to teach at his own seminary. At first he was entrusted with teaching a course in mathematics, and then physics, eloquence, and even philosophy.

Even the most talented people do not immediately reach the top. It also happened with Speransky. He went a long way from a promising student to one of the most intelligent and influential people in the Russian Empire.

Alexei Borisovich Kurakin, a former wealthy and influential man, needed a home secretary. Speransky was recommended to Kurakin and, after a small trial assignment, Mikhail Mikhailovich was hired.

When Paul I became the emperor of Russia, Kurakin managed to become a senator. Kurakin advanced rapidly in the service, and soon rose to the position of prosecutor general. Speransky, on the other hand, always helped Kurakin. When Alexei Borisovich became prosecutor general, Mikhail Mikhailovich began working in his office.

In 1802, Speransky became the secretary of state of Kochubei (who was in great confidence in Alexander I) and moved to the Ministry of Internal Affairs. Speransky's activities in his posts were very constructive, he was appreciated by his colleagues. Having begun his civil service during the reign of Paul I, when officials did not have time to sign various decrees issued one after another, Speransky clearly, concisely and concisely set out his thoughts on paper. Many historians call him the founder of the business language in Russia.

In 1806, Kochubey began to send his own secretary of state in his place to present reports to Alexander I. This is how the emperor and the future great reformer met. On Alexander Pavlovich, Speransky made the most favorable impression. Alexander I became very close to Mikhail Mikhailovich.

After the failure in the European wars with Napoleon, the Russian society criticized the emperor, and he was forced to seek support. It was her that he found in the person of Speransky, who accompanied Alexander I on European trips. In 1808, Alexander I asked him to prepare a document in which he would outline his vision of transformations in Russia. They proposed a number of different reforms, some of which formed the basis of the internal policy of Alexander I.

In early 1810, the Council of State was established. Mikhail Speransky became secretary of state, de facto, he became the second state person after the emperor. Many naturally did not like this. The transformations carried out by him have affected all strata of society. A lot of work has been done with financial reporting. The state stopped issuing banknotes, and control over the financial resources allocated for the needs of the ministries was tightened.

Dissatisfaction with liberal reforms, the expansion of the rights of the lower estates and the restriction of the rights of the nobility, led to great discontent of the nobles. During the intrigue of interested persons, Speransky was accused of usurpation of power, conspiracy with France and espionage in her favor. Mikhail Mikhailovich was sent into exile, he did not admit his guilt, and more than once he wrote letters to the emperor, in which he easily deflected all accusations from himself.

Speransky did not waste his time in exile. He was engaged in creativity, wrote articles and books, mostly religious. Over the years, he became more and more religious person. In 1816 he asked to be returned to civil service. This was not the first attempt by Speransky to return to social activities. This time, the emperor satisfied her, and appointed the disgraced reformer head (governor) of the Penza province.

In 1819 Mikhail Speransky became Governor-General of Siberia. In two years he will be in St. Petersburg. Already in the capital of the empire, Mikhail will complete his project to reorganize the management of Siberia, which will be approved by Alexander I. Returning to St. Petersburg, Mikhail Mikhailovich works as a member of the State Council, the Siberian Committee and the rank of head of the Commission for drafting laws. Soon a new emperor ascended to the Russian throne - Nicholas I.

Nicholas I asked Mikhail Speransky to prepare a speech on the day of the coronation. He coped with this task brilliantly. Under Nicholas I, Speransky did, perhaps, the most significant work of his life - he streamlined the legislation of the Russian Empire. 45 volumes of legislative and regulatory legal acts that existed in the Russian Empire were published. At the same time, Speransky was compiling the Code of Laws of the Russian Empire. For his productive activities in important administrative positions, Speransky was awarded the Order of St. Andrew the First-Called. In January 1839 he was granted the title of count. A month later, Count Mikhail Mikhailovich Speransky died.

There were ups and downs in Speransky's biography. A brilliant reformer of his time, distinguished by liberal views, who at the end of his life still became a supporter of autocratic power. This personality is colorful and interesting, Speransky's activities can be assessed in different ways, but he is of great interest, even today.