<<
>>

§ 2.3 Elections and structure of the Academic group

To imperial Academy of sciences and universities the official representation in state bodies for the first time has been guaranteed. However, the Establishment of the State Council of 1906 not only has not fixed these guarantees, but, on the contrary, somewhat "washed away" them, having limited suffrages of the higher scientifically-educational institutions the countries.

The scientifically-teaching community has received a quota on election only six members of the State Council (item 16 UGS). In Russia to the beginning of 1906 9 universities were. [263] thereby, at the most favorable outcome of elections, only it was possible to six establishments of the given selective curia to participate through the representatives in legislative activity of chamber. Means, a minimum of 4-5 establishments of the academic selective curia within the limits of each selective cycle have been forced to be content only with the active suffrage and for them elections at the first stage became the last. Differently, the laws fixing representation of a science in the State Council, at all did not guarantee direct participation in activity of the top legislative chamber of each of electoral colleges. [264] accordingly in 1906-1917 from
11 establishments constituting the academic curia of the State Council, in it five imperial universities have been never presented: Warsaw, Kiev, Odessa, Saratov and Tomsk.

Elections were two-sedate: at the first stage the imperial Academy of sciences and each imperial Russian university selected on three candidates (elector), and already the congress of these electors gathering in Sankt - Petersburg, chose from the circle of members of the State Council (item 16 UGS). Candidates selected full Academic Meeting of full members of Academy of sciences, but from among ordinary academicians, and also Councils of universities from among ordinary professors.

By May, 1st, 1906 the Academy of sciences totaled 39 full members, of which the Academic Meeting (§ 5 Charters of Academy of sciences), including 33 ordinary and 4 extraordinary academicians and 2 graduateds in a military academy consisted. [265]

University council consisted «of all professors of university» (item 28 obshcheuniversitetskogo the charter). Thus at nine imperial Russian universities by January, 1st, 1906 there were 8 professors of divinity, 456 ordinary and 150 extraordinary professors. [266]

Accordingly in 1906 the political rights given to scientific community on the academic selective curia, according to Establishment of the State Council, were meted as follows: by the active suffrage have been allocated about 653 people, and passive - approximately 497 people Thus, 6 representatives in the State Council constituted approximately 1,2 % from total of applicants.

Members of chamber were selected secretly. The order of promotion of deputies was not regulated by the law. Usually it was made by giving of notes. In them one candidate more often was specified. Put forward and agreed to be the elite stood spheres. On occasion at once voted spheres of all present electors. At such vote voters supported or against each of candidates. The elite appeared received overwhelming majority of voices. At equality of voices the lot rushed. In the absence of the persons who have received overwhelming majority of voices, for other day the second round was spent.

In case of unsuccessfulness of this by-election, for the third day definitive elections were made. For election in it there was enough relative majority of voices (the item

21 UGS). [267]

Term of deputy powers was equaled to nine years. Each three years third of members of the State Council was updated: to the place of leaving on a lot the new were selected.

In case of opening of vacancies in an elective part of the State Council not less than one year prior to the regular election it was displaced with the candidate who has received on last elections overwhelming majority of voices. In the absence of such persons a new election was held at new structure of electors. The new member was selected till the end of a term of appointment of the predecessor and participated in a toss-up for definition of third leaving after the expiration trehletija. The vacancy opening less than one year prior to the regular election, was displaced with nobody. [268]

Elections in the State Council organised the ministries in which conducting there were corresponding curia. [269] but it did not mean, that the ministry of national education had any control powers at elections to the State Council, in everyone
Case, in the legislation is not present a uniform mention of it. The organisation of elections frequently was meant as coordination actions of the ministry: appointment of date of elections (finishing to electors of the imperial decree appointing dates of elections), granting of a premise, means for elections, etc. Opinion of the ministry of this or that question is more true, concerning elections in the State Council had exclusively recommendatory character. [270] however, despite it, at some universities elections were organised taking into account opinion of the ministry of national education. [271] it also speaks the scarcity, an insufficient readiness of the norms regulating elections in the State Council. To procedure of election of members of the State Council one article of its Establishment which, naturally, could not embrace all questions of the suffrage on the given curia has been taken away only. Therefore, Councils of some high schools have been forced to be guided by own legislation and to make elections on obshcheuniversitetskomu to the charter, but in the presence of blanks quite often addressed for explanations to the ministry of national education. However, taking into consideration ministry offers, universities gave a tribute to requirements more likely hierarchical subordination, but not to electoral law requirements. In any case, the opinion of supervising body though had unessential character, but played a considerable role in elections.

On the eve of elections before Councils of universities and the Academic Meeting of imperial Academy of sciences, there was a question on voting fulfilling duties of the ordinary professor, about a voice transfer of an absent member of Council of university or Academy general meeting.

Council of imperial Kharkov university has addressed for explanations of these questions in the ministry of national education. The ministry has answered, that the voice transfer is supposed «and, apparently, there it has been admitted». [272] Council of imperial Tomsk university also has admitted a voice transfer of the professor absent at session to the present. [273]

However, considering recommendations of the ministry of national education, in rather not numerous structure of electoral colleges from the academic curia, elections did not differ uniformity. Councils of universities not only did not listen to each other, but opposite decisions, on the contrary, made. The St.-Petersburg university, for example, of a voice transfer has enacted the majority vote (42 against 13), that the voice transfer absent at session of Council by a member present «does not answer the spirit of elections» therefore «cannot be admissible». [274]

As to a question on degree of suffrages i.o. The ordinary professor Council of the St.-Petersburg university has come to opinion «strictly to be guided and literally to execute at election of electors of members of the State Council of item 7 of the Nominal Highest Decree on February, 20th, i.e. elections to make exclusively from among ordinary professors». [275] However the next year Council has made decision to admit to participation in
Elections of candidates for the State Council with the passive suffrage and further was guided by this decision. [276]

The legislation did not forbid the academic curia to use own rules of law at elections of candidates of the State Council, especially the first convocation. Meanwhile obshcheuniversitetsky the Charter of 1884 could not regulate all subtleties of manufacture of elections in the State Council as has been accepted long before the state reforms and did not contain communication with the state transformations of beginning HH century the Blank in that case was filled at the discretion of General meeting of imperial Academy of sciences, and also Councils of the higher educational institutions delegating the representatives in the State Council, and quite often entered into the contradiction with norms of its Establishment. [277]

The incident which has occurred at imperial Jurevsky university became one of remembered examples of imperfection of the legislation on elections in the State Council from the ucheno-pedagogical environment, caused, subsequently, rather brisk discussion in upper chamber general meeting. Council of the given high school at election of candidates in members of the State Council on a level with the Russian professors has admitted to participation in voting of two professors - the subject foreign states. Meanwhile, according to the Russian legislation foreign subjects have been deprived any political rights, including selective (item 20 UGS, item 18 UGD).

The specified circumstance became an occasion to giving by the professor of Jurevsky university I.L. Kondakovym complaints, in conformity of item 22 of Establishment of the State Council, in the Commission for check of correctness of elections of members of the State Council (further - the Commission on elections). [278]

The commission on elections has made decision to dismiss the complaint of the professor in view of insignificance as it seemed to its members, arguments resulted in the complaint. Meanwhile, voting, at least and at the first stage, the foreign professors who are not consisting in Russian citizenship, has caused considerable interest of participants of general meeting of the State Council. [279]

Discussion round this question, caused by absence of the direct answer to it, mentions also other questions at issue of elections in the State Council from the academic selective curia (volume of powers of Councils of universities and the ministry of national education by manufacture of elections in the upper chamber, for example). Therefore, in our opinion, it is necessary to stop more in detail on the given incident and its discussion in the parliament upper chamber.

So, having considered the complaint and having convinced by that in an electoral college from nine higher educational institutions any professor the foreigner has not been selected, and the arguments resulted in it, concerned only to the first stage of elections, namely elections of electors, the commission has come to conclusion, that elections of six members of the State Council from a science should be approved. Besides election of electors of six members of the State Council from the academic curia is entrusted general meeting of Academy of sciences and Councils of universities. Hence, according to members of the Commission on elections, «check of correctness of activity of these boards entirely belongs to those establishments in which conducting they consist (i.e. to the ministry of national education - S.A.), instead of to the State Council».

On general meeting of the State Council has acted on D.I.Bagalej's this question. Having agreed with the correct elections which have been quite precisely observed with the literal requirement of the law, namely item 16 and item 20 UGS the professor, thereby, has supported a commission conclusion. In its opinion: « These two articles of the law have in view of two various stages of elections and absolutely precisely define an order of elections, both in the first stage, and in the second... As to that first stage of elections about which it was just spoken the law in application to it gives only one, and I should notice and underline this, unique requirement, consisting that electors should be selected Akademieju - from among ordinary academicians, and Council of each university - from among its ordinary professors. Hence, to this unique requirement also should satisfy those boards in which there was a first stage of elective manufacture ». [280] Thus, D.I.Bagalej, after the commission has counted not contradicting the law the fact of participation of two foreign citizens in elections as they at the moment of manufacture of elections were high-grade members of council of Jurevsky university.

So unequivocal conclusion has caused disagreement of some members of the State Council in this connection, has generated long debate on the given question at session of the general structure of Council on May, 26th, 1906

The opposite position was occupied with prince N.F.Kasatkin. It has found illegal actions of foreign professors and believed, that elections «come under to the cassation». [281] Further in discussion the opinion on abnormality of the made elections began to prevail. N.A.Zinovev after F.D.Samarin, has put following arguments: «on the basis of charter item 44 about service by definition from the government, foreigners are accepted on service as teachers in educational institutions and can be ordinary or extraordinary professors; but when this rule, then was established
Was not available in view of, that the university structure will operate as political establishment and to make elections in the State Council. Now in the law the blank which should be explained on exact equity of statute was found out. In one country foreigners do not take part in political elections that is why and at us can be never admitted to participation in this political certificate. In our legislation the principle of perfect elimination from participation in any political actions is spent... And if at the law edition it has been lost sight, that the structure of university council can include foreign citizens, apparently, that to professors followed such foreigners be eliminated from participation from voting because such participation is

282

Illegal ». [282]

Thus, opinions of participants of debate on the given question were divided into what recognised elections correct, doing not come under to the cassation (the commission on elections, D.I.Bagalej) and supporters of the negative relation to manufacture of elections. The last, in turn, were divided into those who because of insignificance of the admitted deviations from sense of the legislation did not demand re-elections (F.D.Samarin, N.A.Zinovev, P.H.Shvanebah, A.S.Yermolov) and what radically were against a recognition of legitimacy of elections of the first six of representatives of high schools and the academic science of the elite in the State Council (N.F.Kasatkin and two more members of the State Council who has voted, subsequently, for carrying out of re-elections).

Vsvjazi with imperfection of the legislation on elections in the State Council can seem, at first sight, that each separately taken opinion acted on the given question is quite well-founded and is worthy. At the same time, by detailed consideration of the arguments stated in them, it is difficult to recognise advantage of any one opinion.

Tone on a discussed question has been set by the commission on elections, the report from which name M.V.Krasovsky has read. However, considering authority of the commission which structure included visible statesmen of that epoch, we will try to reveal weaknesses of its position, nevertheless.

In our opinion, not the Commission conclusion, concerning a question on granting of full free-hand in election of electors to boards of scientifically-educational corporations, in a kind of is absolutely correct that as a part of the last, on a level with citizens of the Russian empire there were foreign citizens, with all following rights and duties. Despite the express prohibition to select representatives of other states in the State Council, nevertheless, under the general charter of universities operating on that moment foreigners, in this case professors of universities, without any restrictions could use the active suffrage, supporting thereby in elections of the closest colleagues. In this case formally article 20 UGS though has not been broken, at the same time it is necessary to recognise, that the part of suffrages of foreigners is recognised, and, hence, wishes of foreign professors of the authorised representatives in the State Council to see considered. Thus, in this part the commission report, in our opinion, contradicted the general sense of the law of the excluding foreigner as participant of public mutual relations with the Russian state.

In it has fairly specified one of visible a member of the State Council from societies of noble family - F.D.Samarin. It has explained, that voting even at that stage on which they participated in Jurevsky university in the form of voters of probable members of the State Council is not admissible. The commissions should «be reserved, that though participation of foreigners in selective board is represented wrong but as cancellation of elections practically would not have influence on an outcome of elections in this case elections will hold good». [283]

Further in the report of the Commission on elections the conclusion that it is not necessary to extend the competence of the State Council to the first stage of elections contains. At the same time, M.V.Krasovsky in business of check of correctness of elections not absolutely truly, in our opinion, preferred the Ministry of national education. The ministry owing to supervising position over imperial Academy of sciences and universities urged to organise elections in the establishments entrusted to it, instead of to supervise this procedure. These powers as we have shown above, have been entrusted General meeting of imperial Academy of sciences and Councils of universities.

As to the antithetic about abnormality of the spent elections, that, besides, it is not necessary to adhere unequivocally and this version as, formally as it was convincingly proved by D.I.Bagalej, elections have passed in conformity with the current legislation though and not to the full.

To the above-stated opinion of the dear professor it is necessary to add the following: unlike the clergy which elections have been in detail adjusted by a special rule, [284] for elective representatives of other curia rules UGS only in general regulating process of elections extended. Procedure of election of electors from the academic curia also to the full has not been reflected in UGS.

Instead, according to article 16 UGS the right to select electors in the State Council, has been given scientifically-educational institutions the countries, received quotas on election of the representatives in the State Council. [285] thus, manufacture of elections in Council on
The first stage, UGS indirectly sends to the legislation of these establishments, that is to their charters. But also here there were no unequivocal rules of election of potential members of the State Council as norms of the charter of Academy of sciences also as well as norms of charters of universities of that time, were not corrected together with the state reforms of the beginning of the XX-th century. To universities does not remain anything other how to make elections on usual rules of the elections provided for representatives of given corporations, on general meetings of Academy of sciences and Councils of universities, not excepting participation as that demands item 3, item 20 UGS, foreign academicians and professors.

Nevertheless, it is necessary to agree, somewhat, with opinion supporting the second variant of the permission of the given question and to recognise the arguments of its supporters deserving special attention.

The matter is that earlier councils of universities had really the right to hold an election, being guided by the charter on which it was supposed to participate in Council of university of all its professors including foreigners. However, as has correctly noticed P.H.Shvanebah, the given participation of foreigners consisted in conducting exclusively educational and economic affairs of university. Therefore, the lecturer has noticed, «it is represented absolutely irrational from this to infer, that to such professor, thanks to conditions of the academic service, the political rights of the Russian citizen, including the right of voting of members of the higher legislative institution in Empire» are given. [286] Accordingly, after the law on April, 24th, 1906 Has actually given to universities the political rights, having admitted them to participation in legislative activity through the selected professors, it was necessary to discharge directly of voting in the State Council of foreigners. However, in our opinion to forbid it followed not by interpretation of existing rules, and legislative
By. In particular changes some norms of the chapter V obshcheuniversitetskogo demanded the Charter of 1884 on which elections in the State Council, apparently, were made.

In this connection, most precisely, in our opinion, there was A.S.Yermolov. In its opinion, elections can to be rescinded, but the further legislation «about the rights of university councils» is necessary for modifying and adapting for the changed political system. [287]

As the core the report of the Commission on elections, however, was considered. The decisions accepted in it, in most cases, were only formally discussed on general meetings of the State Council for decision removal. We will remind, that consideration of the questions connected with elections, have been almost always politically focused: «in disputable cases, - as researchers mark, - right insisted on cancellation of election left and centrists, left some centrists - right and left specified in illegality of elections right. As any group had no steady majority, offers on cancellation of elections usually deviated». [288] In this case, with elections from the academic curia business was so. The majority of senators on the given question have appeared are solidary with each other. All of them, except for three, have refused to vote against cancellation of elective manufacture concerning representatives of a science.

Can seem, that such decision of the State Council is taken out in item 3 infringement. Item 20 UGS. However it not absolutely and the State Council has taken out, in this case, quite correct decision which is not contradicting the legislation. The matter is that above-stated article contained an interdiction only concerning selected members of the State Council, but not selecting. Besides, the decision of the State Council as we see, is taken out in a concrete case at Jurevsky university, that
Most carries private, to some extent rezoljutivnyj character, that at all did not mean a recognition of suffrages of foreign professors.

Thus, precedent is caused by imperfection of the legislation, but not in its infringement. However in order to avoid similar case repetition, Pravitelstvujushchy the Senate in January, 1907, has forbidden to participate in elections on the academic curia the citizen of other states. The Senate motivated the decision as follows: if to recognise for foreigners-professors the right of participation in university Council at election of electors it is necessary to recognise them as well the right to be the selected electors. Means, as a part of congress there would be the electors deprived of the right to be by the elite in members of the State Council as the debaring to be the elite in members of Council «corresponds to general provisions of foreign citizens to which our legislation gives using within Empire only the civil rights, eliminating them from participation even in election zemskih and city vowels». [289]

Thanks to coordination actions of the ministry of national education, elections of candidates for the State Council at universities and in Academy of sciences passed approximately at a time.

On March, 18th, 1906 Council of the Petersburg university has started election of electors of members of the State Council. Manufacture of elections have decided to divide on two stages: at first «by means of notes», selected candidates for electors (not less than 10 voices), then from the planned candidates, the closed vote by spheres, selected directly electors. [290]

Thus, 58 present at session of members of Council of imperial St.-Petersburg university, were rozdany lists of all ordinary professors. More than 10 voices have received 9 ordinary professors, from which, on the majority of selective spheres, electors in members
The state Council have been selected: the rector of university I.I. Borgman, professor V.I.Sergeevich and A.A. Foreigners. [291]

Election of electors from Academy of sciences lasted three days: 18, on March, 19th and 20, 1906 In the first day A.A.Shakhmatov's academicians (24 voices from 31) and A.S.lappo (20 voices from 31) as received overwhelming majority of voices have been selected. Other seven academicians who participated in vote, have received relative majority of voices against their election. Elections of the third candidate have transferred next day.

On March, 19th four academicians from 26 present members of Conference, on which results unique I.P.Borodin have undergone to vote has come nearer to an election threshold, having received equal quantity of voices of the colleagues pro's and con's (13 against 13). Thus, elections it decided to transfer once again, already on 00 ch. 30 minutes on March, 20th. In the named date, despite so late for session of Conference hour, for manufacture of elections, have gathered in an emergency order of 25 members of Academy. On voting two academicians from whom I.P.Borodin has received 22 voices from total of the present have been put forward. [292]

Thus, in April, 1906, on congress of electors of members of the State Council from the academic curia as that demanded item 16 UGS, from Academy have been delegated: A.A.Shakhmatov, A.S.lappo and I.P.Borodin. In these elections, besides imperial Academy of sciences, 27 electors from nine imperial Russian universities have taken part.

Members of the State Council from the given congress have been selected by D.I.Bagalej (the Kharkov university), I.I.Borgman (the St.-Petersburg university), V.I.Vernadsky (the Moscow university), V.O.Kljuchevsky
(The Moscow university), and two academicians, known to us under election returns in Academy of sciences: A.S.lappo and A.A.Shakhmatov. [293]

Apparently, the Academy of sciences and the Moscow university have managed to spend to the State Council about two members, i.e. on 2/3 electors, accordingly on 1/3 all structures of the academic curia.

However, at more detailed analysis of structure of the academic curia of the State Council, we can observe large majority of full members of Academy of sciences in its structure. Besides A.S.lappo Danilevsky and A.A.Shakhmatov of members of imperial Academy of sciences two more representatives of the elite from the Moscow university were valid: ordinary academician V.O.Kljuchevsky and the graduated in a military academy of Academy of sciences - V.I.Vernadsky selected on this post on March, 4th, 1906, on the eve of elections in the State Council. [294] thus, to the beginning of the first session of the State Council as it is truly noted in the report of the minister of national education, Academies belonged not two representatives, and four (66 % of structure of the academic deputy group). [295]

Coincidence of circumstances so favorable for imperial Academy of sciences speaks all the same imperfection of the legislation on elections in the State Council. On the one hand, the law has not established a proportional election system in the academic curia. With another - regular representatives of Academy of sciences had the legitimate right to read lectures at universities and to occupy in them chairs. [296] thanks to this possibility to occupy ordinary posts simultaneously in Academy of sciences and the universities, each of the presented establishments, theoretically, acquired the right to spend more than the representatives, than were is delegated on congress
Electors in St.-Petersburg (i.e. at favorable elections, more than half of structure of the academic curia). [297] At the same time as a result of the same factors already at the second stage of elections the considerable part of boards could remain at all without the representative in the State Council. Academicians paid attention to it, however to discussion on it, and have not returned, anyway, on general meeting of Academy of sciences. [298]

Overwhelming part of members of the State Council, for all history of the upper chamber, were izbranny from capital (St.-Petersburg, Moscow) scientifically-educational institutions. Among the circumstances favouring to election of university professors by members of the academic curia of the State Council, it is necessary to note a residence of the candidate and the possibility of combination of duties of a member of the State Council caused by it with lecturing at provincial university. The matter is that the "office" ("official") qualification - a condition the ordinary academician of imperial Academy of sciences or the ordinary professor of imperial universities - created to the deputy - to the professor of peripheral high school essential inconveniences for work in the State Council. The Professor-deputy had no possibility to refuse discharge of duties of the professor at university as in that case automatically left Council structure as the lost qualification. [299] it is visible for this reason, from 17 members selected from the academic curia for all period of short activity of reformed State Council, 12 (71 %) represented Academy of sciences and two capital universities. From them 7 (about 41 %) - were members of Academy of sciences, including: 5 academicians (nearby
29,4 %) have been selected directly from Academy, [300 two (about 11,8 %) - were called from universities, occupying in them posts corresponding to the voting qualification. [301] however if to consider that fact, that the selected deputies from V.O.Kljuchevsky and P.P.Pustoroslev's given curia have not accepted any participation in work of the State Council, [302] at its one session, that, actually, 40 % (6 of 15) structure of the academic curia were representatives of Academy of sciences. Thus, the share of representation of the Academy, directly selected the given establishment in the State Advice has constituted third of the general number of deputies of the academic curia (5 of 15). Any establishment of the academic curia did not manage to provide bolshee quantity of representatives in Council, than Academy of sciences. From the St.-Petersburg university 4 members, from Moscow - 3 members, two members from university in Kazan, and on one deputy of the State Council have been selected, have been selected from Jurevsky and Kharkov universities.

As a whole, sessional participation of representatives of the academic selective curia in the State Council is shown in the appendix. Apparently, direct participation of Academy of sciences is fixed only in seven sessions from thirteen. At the same time the academy has been indirectly presented at all sessions of the State Council, except for VII session. [303] opposite, direct participation during all period of activity of the State Council the St.-Petersburg university has caused a stir only. And, during the period with V on XII session inclusive, all three electors from the St.-Petersburg university consisted members of the State Council.

It is necessary to note and the Kazan university as selected its Council in 1907 A.V.Vasilev, stretch consisted the deputy of the State Council up to February, 1917

From 17 persons of the elite from Academy of sciences and universities in the upper chamber, two professors (V.O.Kljuchevsky, P.P.Pustoroslev) were included into the upper chamber only on a vacation and further are not considered. One former member from a science has been selected subsequently in Council from a zemstvo (E.N.Trubetsky). Average duration of membership in Council from a science - 3 years of 9 months. So small time is caused appreciably by that all elite in 1906 has quickly combined powers (one - already in 2 days, four - in 2,5 months and one - in 9 months). Subsequently only two from them have been again selected. If not to consider three other, sitting at chamber less than three months average time of membership in it to raise till 4 years of 9 months. Two representatives of a science (33 % of delegation) were included into the State Council since February 1907 for 1917 (A.V.Vasilev, D.D. The Grimm).

Two representatives of this curia (13 %) were included earlier into the State Duma (A.V.Vasilev, M.M.Kovalevsky). One - was the chairman zemskoj justices, another in the end of the stay in chamber has been selected city by a head (D.I.Bagalej).

On imperial service till 1917 considered persons did not occupy posts above rectors of universities (those was 5 (33 %), and also 1 assistant to the rector, 3 deans, the secretary of imperial Academy of sciences and the director of the first branch of library of imperial Academy of sciences). One professor was also the banker (I.H.Ozerov). [304]

In the ratio with Tabelju about post ranks had the following equivalent:

- The rector - IV class (the valid councillor of state);

- The dean and the ordinary professor - V class (councillor of state);

- The extraordinary professor - VI class (the collegiate adviser). [305]

Leading posts of Academy of sciences also corresponded to certain class ranks:

- The indispensable secretary - IV class;

- The ordinary academician - IV class;

- The extraordinary academician, the graduated in a military academy - V class. [306]

CHinoproizvodstvennyj the status of scientific and pedagogical posts influenced birth status of those from their carriers which did not belong to nobility. [307] rank of the valid councillor of state (IV class) the official granted the transition right in hereditary nobility, personal nobility received on reaching a rank of the titular counsellor (IX class). [308]

All 15 members of the academic group were hereditary noblemen, including 10 - by origin, 1 - from petty bourgeoises, 1 - obrusevshy the Finnish emigrant, 1 - from peasants, the origin of a two is not found out., However, researcher A.P.Borodin carries the last to an origin of noble family. [309 12 members carried a rank of the valid councillor of state, 3 - the councillor of state. [310]

However at the heart of advancement on an office ladder on the ministry of national education scientific degree presence laid. [311] thus "candidate" (till 1884), [312] for example, from petty-bourgeois estate became

«The personal honourable citizen», and "master" and, hence, "doctor"

313

Were erected in «personal nobility». [313]

The party accessory of the candidate was prominent feature of elections of the academic curia. By then, large majority of scientific community as we have mentioned in chapter 1 of the given research, represented opposition, many of which consisted members konstitutsionnoyodemokraticheskoj parties. Thus, despite active intervention

314

The governments in questions of party views of civil servants, [314]

Cadets managed to spend to structure of the State Council of the representatives from the academic curia. All deputies behind a small exception (members of the State Council from V.A.Afanasev and P.P.Pustoroslev's universities) belonged to cadet party, or sympathised with its views. And about half of elite from the given curia its Central Committees consisted members. [315]

It is necessary to notice, that the party of National freedom initially was against participation of the members in the upper chamber, expecting protivodumsky character of its activity. [316] leaders of cadet party, well understood the purposes and character of reform of the State Council as upper chamber of parliament which as if "filter" should drop through itself bills
The lower chamber, having protected thereby reigning from consequences of the statement or

317 deviations objectionable a bill ruling clique. [317]

Nevertheless, the Central Committee has enacted to dispatch in local committees the telegramme of the following maintenance: «disapproving certainly to new establishment of the State Council and refusing the organised party propaganda at elections in this establishment, the Central Committee of cadet party does not consider, however, possible to recommend to separate party members to refrain from voting, and it is equal from acceptance of a rank of a member of the State Council». [318]

Such decision of the Central Committee besides the other is connected and with necessity to trace occurring processes in «the parliament upper chamber» for the purpose of more effective carrying out during a life of the tactical and strategic problems. For this purpose the Central Committee of cadet party, in particular, also has organised joint session with the representatives of the party chosen in members of the State Council, developing a line of conduct in this state

319

Body. [319]

Thus, since first day of the stay in the State Council began to work in the spirit of the program of the party.

Position of party of National freedom in the State Council was discussed at session of the Central Committee of party on May, 6th, 1906 Under V.I.Vernadsky's report in the State Council «our 11 (from which one doubtful) + 3 relatives and 2 appointed». Including 5 - from Academy of sciences, 5 - from zemskih meetings of the Vologda, Vjatsky, Kostroma, Samara and Ufa provinces and 1 - from congress of land owners of the Mogilyov province, 3 relatives are CHavchavadze,
Kamensk and Baulin, and 2 appointed is Kobeko and Kulomzin. [320] In the subsequent Central Committee time and again showed interest to representatives of the party in the State Council. [321] everything as researchers mark, Central Committee sessions, with a mention of the State Council or its members, it has been spent forty three, that constitutes 13 % from all sessions of the Central Committee during upper chamber activity.

Thus, as a part of the State Council members from the academic curia were a kernel left (since 1913 - progressive) the group connected with fraction of party of national freedom in the State Duma. The structure of the left group also included liberal members of the State Council from the zemstvoes, separate members from trade and the industry and even one member from societies of noble family. However skeleton it was constituted by members at elections from Imperial Academy of sciences and imperial universities. Because of it the left group sometimes named Academic.

Group association, according to some researchers, has occurred already at the very beginning of activity of the State Council, namely, during debate under the address project in reply to speech of the tsar on April, 27th, 1906 in the Winter palace. [322] however, under the certificate of periodicals of that time,
Association has occurred at private meeting on April, 26th, 1906. [323] by the end of the first session, in the left group 12 persons were. [324]

The given group was concerning small and, at various times, consolidated from 9 to 19 members of the upper chamber. The group was sympathised with some members of the State Council to destination, but enter it they could not, being afraid of dismissal from presence. In total in 1 906-1917 in structure of the left group 38 persons, including 14 - from a science entered. In 1906, 1908-1909 to the left adjoined 5 of 6 members from the academic curia, in the rest of the time - all

325

Six. [325]

The 48-year-old professor of Russian history of the Kharkov university cadet D.I.Bagalej became the first chairman of the left group. After D.I.Bagaleja's who has made thus the protest against dissolution of I Duma resignation, the group since February, 1907 stretch was headed by cadet D.D. The Grimm. [326]

The group was concerning young (to the youngest I.H.Ozerov, at the moment of election there were 40 years) and enough active. [327] members of the academic group because of high intellectual qualities and competence were selected time and again lecturers of the special commissions on the important questions. A special indicator of fruitful activity of the academic group as a part of the State Council, in our opinion, is their participation in upper chamber standing committees in which chamber primary activity concentrated. It is necessary to notice, that the overwhelming majority participated in them
Representatives of the academic curia, 11 from 15 members (about 73,5 %). For all time of the powers, in standing committees were selected A.V.Vasilev, D.D. The Grimm, M.A.Djakonov, A.A.Shakhmatov. The considerable period of the deputy powers in sessions of the specified commissions also participated M.M.Kovalevsky, D.I.Bagalej, I.H.Ozerov. As a whole, practically not one of standing committees of the State Council has not done without participation of representatives of the academic group State. At various times, depending on quantity of members of the commissions, the percent of their participation was equaled from 2,9 % to 13,3 %.

<< | >>
A source: ARCHEGOV Soslan Batrazovich. the ACADEMIC GROUP of the STATE COUNCIL (1906-1917): ISTORIKO-LEGAL RESEARCH. The dissertation on competition of a scientific degree of the master of laws. St.-Petersburg - 2016. 2016

More on topic § 2.3 Elections and structure of the Academic group:

  1. THE CHAPTER II. THE LEGAL STATUS AND STRUCTURE OF THE ACADEMIC GROUP
  2. § 2.2 Features of a legal status of the Academic group
  3. § 2.1 General characteristic of a legal status of the Academic group as elective members of the State Council
  4. the Appendix 4. The academic group as a part of standing committees of the State Council. [537]
  5. THE CHAPTER I. FORMATION OF THE LEGISLATION ON THE ACADEMIC GROUP OF THE STATE COUNCIL
  6. the Chapter III. LEGISLATIVE ACTIVITY of the ACADEMIC GROUP In I-XIII SESSIONS of the STATE COUNCIL
  7. ARCHEGOV It is banished Batrazovich. the ACADEMIC GROUP of the STATE COUNCIL (1906-1917): ISTORIKO-LEGAL RESEARCH. The dissertation on competition of a scientific degree of the master of laws. St.-Petersburg - 2016, 2016
  8. § 1. Fault as an element of structure of the is selective-legal tort and compulsory condition of konstitutsionno-legal responsibility of participants of elections
  9. value of a pathology of an ENT - of organs in structure of a case rate of group chaego ill children.
  10. the Comparative morphological analysis of anatrophic gastritis at persons of the senior age group (research group) and persons young and middle age (control group)
  11. Structure and algorithm of instruction of the inoculated logic neural network on the basis of a method of the group account of arguments.
  12. the Clinical characteristic of an atrophic gastritis at persons of the senior age group (research group) and persons young and middle age (control group)
  13. the Endoscopic characteristic of an atrophic gastritis at persons of the senior age group (research group) and persons young and middle age (control group)