The Russian Revolutionary Movement

Preface

THE following historical sketch of the revolutionary movement in Russia was originally written with the sole object of enlightening public opinion in a country—Finland—where knowledge of this movement was perhaps even scantier than elsewhere. In the Finnish Grand Duchy the loyalty of the people to the sovereign, fostered by the fidelity of the successive Russian rulers to the compact entered into by Alexander I. with the Finnish ‘‘ Estates,” had always been too sincere to suffer any sympathies to be entertained for those who opposed Tsardom in Russia. The various revolutionary attempts had caused the same horrified astonishment in Finland as in other foreign countries. Alexander II. had liberated the Russian serfs; he had proved liberal in all his dealings with Finland: therefore Finns as a rule regarded those who repeatedly attempted to kill him as criminals. That the Tsar-liberator also had sanctioned the ruthless policy of Muravieff the “‘ hangman” in Poland, and had done his best to curtail the very reforms introduced in the beginning of his reign, hardly anyone in Finland took into account, because hardly anyone in Finland knew the truth about the state of affairs in Russia.

The same causes produced the same effect during most of tfe reign of Alexander III. He was loyal to his Finnish subjects, and the Finns were loyal to him, never troubling their heads very much about the interior development within Russia.

vi PREFACE.

It was reserved for Nicholas II., the son and successor of Alexander III., to revolutionise the relations that had existed for ninety years between Russia and Finland. When in 1899 the policy of unification suggested to him by foolishly short-sighted advisers caused him to break his solemn promise to rule Finland in accordance with its constitution, he compelled the Finns to seek for friends and allies in the uneven struggle forced upon them. Everyone, while comprehending that the ultimate aim of the new policy was nothing less than the complete annihilation of Finland as an autonomous state and of the Finnish people as a distinct national unit, comprehended also that Finland would be unable singlehanded to carry on the fight against autocracy with any chance of success. Yet it was evident that no allies might be counted upon in the Western world, no Power having any reason to step into the arena for Finland’s sake, even though every civilised nation expressed sincere sympathy with the Finns, and strongly condemned the faithlessness of the Tsar and of his Government.

The only possible allies were clearly to be looked for in Russia itself among the men who for many years had been relentlessly fighting autocratic despotism. It was becoming necessary to arrive at an understanding with the different opposition parties in the Empire in order to unite forces with the men who, in spite of the tremendous odds against them, had succeeded in causing the foundations of the throne of the Tsar to shake and tremble. But these very men were in Finland regarded as criminals, or at the best as utopians of a dangerous kind, wholly incapable of anything but destructive work.

Under such circumstances the first thing to be done was manifestly the work of enlightening public opinion in Finland in regard to the internal development and the revolutionary movement in Russia. Advanced members of the Finnish

PREFACE. vii

‘opposition immediately took this work in hand, publishing in every issue of the clandestine papers accounts of occurrepces in the Empire, and advocating in the same widely spread publications an alliance with all other parties struggling for liberty and human rights in the Tsar’s dominions.

The book now put before Anglo-Saxon readers was written as part of this work of enlightenment. In order to give a ‘comprehensive idea of the relation of causes to effect, it had to describe the internal policy pursued by the different rulers of Russia, as well as the still more revolutionary opposition engendered by this very policy. In order again to render the description accessible to the great mass of readers, it was necessary to concentrate the material as much as possible, and to leave out much that Russian friends had supplied and might reasonably have expected to find mentioned in the following pages.

Some reviewers have expressed doubts in regard to the impartiality of the author as manifestly an enemy of Russian autocracy. No partiality has wittingly dictated the opinions expressed, nor have any statements of facts been made without as far as possible having been checked as to correctness by reference to other than revolutionary sources of information. Yet so far as personal impressions and feelings go the author unhesitatingly pleads guilty of partiality to the fighters against autocratic despotism, in the same degree as a lawyer is guilty of partiality to the cause he defends.

The self-sacrificing enthusiasm and the death-despising devotion to ideals which meet the student at every turn in the history of this movement make it difficult to assume and maintain a thoroughly impartial attitude. The pure, altruistic exaltation which has driven the well-nigh countless victims of the struggle to flight into foreign lands, to death on the scaffold or in the icebound wilds of Siberia, affects the vill PREFACE.

coolness of the spectator, and renders it impossible to weigl? to a nicety the faults and the merits of the men and women, of the young girls and boys, who have cheerfully given their liberty and their lives to the great cause of freedom. The beauty of their sacrifices causes the political errors they may have committed to pale into insignificance, and sheds so hideously glaring a light on the crimes of autocracy that the good it has done or has wished to do mayhap disappears too completely from view. Never was there fought an apparently more hopeless fight ; never anywhere was the disproportion between the forces of the combatants greater; nor, on the other hand, was ever the inability of mere material power to withstand the onslaught of ideas more convincingly proved. For notwithstanding the might of the Russian Tsars, notwithstanding the paucity of their own numbers, notwithstanding the inhuman cruelty displayed against them, the revolutionaries have gradually forced autocracy to the very brink of the grave whither it is bound ignominiously to descend in no distant future.

If the present work is able to give the reader a comprehensive idea of the long-protracted struggle which at last has brought victory within sight its aim will have been accom. plished, for in so doing it cannot fail to propagate hatred of autocratic despotism as practised in Russia, and to gain sympathies for those staking their lives and their all for the good of their brethren, the innumerable victims of oppression in the huge Russian Empire.

THE AUTHOR.

Lonpon, June, 1905.

Contents

THE FIRST REVOLUTIONARY OUTBREAK IN RUSSIA.

Peter the Great and Social Evolution—Catherine II. and Court Intrigues— Effects of French Revolution—The Napoleonic Wars and their Results— Liberal Tendencies of Alexander I.—The Welfare Association: its Origin— Northern and Southern Associations—The first great Conspiracy defeated by the Death of Alexander I—The Events of December 26th, 1825—Two Tsars in Russia—Constantine renounces in favour of Nicholas I.—The Dekabrists subdued by Nicholas—Arrest and Execution of the Leaders—Nicholas I. and his Methods of Suppression—The Seeds of Revolution sown by the Dekabrists.

CHAPTER II. Pp. 18—34. THE OPPOSITION UNDER NICHOLAS I

Character of Nicholas I.—His rigorous Measures—Severity of Censorship —Re-organisation and Augmentation of Police—Reaction and Public Opinion Tshaadaieff's Letter in the Moskva Teleskofet—Russia’s Position in Europe in 1849—Her ‘' Invincible" Army—The Attitude towards Despotism—Alexander Herzen's Description of Justice under Nicholas I—An instructive Comparison —Sketch of Herzen's Life—Turgenieff, Bakunin, and Bielinski: their Influence—Bakunin's Expulsion from France and Death at Berne—The Kolokol : its Trustworthiness and wide Circulation—Herzen and the Tsar—Effect of the French Revolution of 1848—The Crimean Catastrophe—The Awakening— Death of Nicholas I.—The Anti-Governmental Spirit.

THE REIGN OF ALEXANDER II.

CHAPTER UI. Pp. 37—57.

THE ERA OF REFORM.

The Limitations of Tsardom—Revolt of Serfs apprehended—Alexander II. and the Serfs—-Speech at Moscow—The Petition of Polish Landowners—The

Xx CONTENTS.

“ Rescript " to Nazimoff—Expectations of Reform disappointed—The History of Serfdom—Boris Godunoff and the Glebe Adscripti—The Wars against the Tartar Khans, and their Demands—Emigration restricted—Development of Serfdom .in Little Russia under Catherine II—The Press and its Researghes —Serfdom partially abolished February 19th, 1861—The Miry—Popular Approval of Communal System—Ransom insisted upon—Terms of Redemption —Growth of Abuses in Land Distribution—The Zemstvos—Judicial Reforms and the Administrative Process—Alexander’s ‘' Liberalism ”—Karakosoff's Attempt—An unheeded Warning.

CHAPTER IV. Pp. 58—75. THE REVOLUTIONARY MOVEMENT UNDER ALEXANDER II

Growth of the Spirit of Opposition—Nihilism in the late Sixties defined— Early Nihilists not revolutionary—The Claims of the younger Generation— The Families and the Government unite in resisting Feminine Aggression— The Exodus to Switzerland—The Craze of Socialism—1871 a Memorable Year—French Influences again—The “ Zurich’ Ukase of 1873—Krapotkin's Memoirs—The Educational Movement and its Aims—Philanthropic Zeal not favourably regarded by Government—The Tshaikovsky Circle and its Members—Kravchinsky (Stepniak), Rogatschoff, and Sophia Perovskaia—Methods of approaching the Working Classes—The “Third Section '’ active—Wholesale Arrests—The Gaps filled—The Situation realised.

CHAPTER V. Pp. 76—96. THE TERROR

Events in the Balkans—The Panslavists—The Masses impassive—General Distress—The Bulgarian Settlement—Kowalsky at Odessa—Trepoff s Methods —Vera Sassulitsch and her Attempt—Her Trial, Acquittal, and Flight—Mesentseff stabbed by Stepniak—Leon Mirski and Solovieff—The Tsar's Narrow Escape—Generdls Gurko and Todleben—A Batch of Executions—Lisogub's Socialism—The Tsar condemned to Death—Leroy Beaulieu on the Position— Strict Precautions~Two abortive Plans—The Odessa and Kursk-Moscow Train Attempts—The “Third Section”—Krapotkin’s Description—Secret Printing Presses—Heroic Work under Difficulties—The Tschorni Perediel— Scharkofi’s Treachery rewarded.

CHAPTER VI. Pp. 97—114. THE LAST YEAR OF THE REIGN OF ALEXANDER II

The Winter Palace Explosion—Halturin’s Plan—The Police suspect—The Tsar uninjured—Loris Melikoff placed at Head of " High Executive Committee —Reforms planned—“ Senatorial Revision ” and the Questions raised —The Zemstvos' Sphere of Action—Liberal Tendencies—Katkoff’s Hostility— The Terrorists sceptical—Mines and Bombs prepared—The Malaia Sadowaia

CONTENTS. xi

&cheme—Melikoff s Plans ripening—Advisory Assembly proposed—Preparatory Committees to propose Bills—Imperial Communiqué drafted—Melikoff’s Success— The Tsar murdered—St. Petersburg in a State of Siege—Capture of

Participators in the Deed—Report of the Cologne Gazette—Sophia Perowskaia’s Execution.

THE REIGN OF ALEXANDER III.

CHAPTER VII. Pp. 117—1332. THE REVOLUTIONISTS AT THE ACCESSION OF ALEXANDER III

Alexander III. on the proposed Reforms—The Ministerial Council's Vote —The Minority—Letter from the Executive Committee—A Warning to the Tsar—The Popular Opinion with reference to the Government—The Choice between Revolution and a Constitution—Conditions laid down—The Document criticised—The Tsar's Remarks to the Grand Duke Vladimir— The German Emperor consulted—The Narodnaia Volia—The “ Holy League” and its Sentences—The ‘* Voluntary Defence’’—A Complexity of Intrigues— Von Plehve at the Head of the Police—Various Schemes—General Skobeleff and Ignatietf conspire—Ignatieff’s Treachery—Pobiedonostseff's Manifesto— Alexander’s Lack of Intelligence—Letter to the Grand Duke Vladimir—A Coup d' Etat—Melikoff's Defeat.

CHAPTER VIII. Pp. 133—143. THE INFLUENCE OF THE SLAVOPHILES IN THE DEVELOPMENT

A New Period—The Terrorists’ Chance of Success—Pobiedonostseff and Slavophilism—Various Phases of its Development—Katkoff's Slavophilism compared with that of the Brothers Aksakoff—The Earlier Programme and its Contradictions—Leroy Beaulieu's Distinction—Katkoff's Career—Slavophilism becomes Panslavism—The Moskowskia Viedomosti and the Turkish War—Civilisation resisted—Publication of Constantine Aksakoff's Memorandum in the Russ—Herbert A. Thompson on the Slavophile Party— Champions of Reaction.

CHAPTER IX. Pp. 144—154

ALEXANDER II. AND HIS MINISTERS.

The Tsar in Private Life—Futile’ Biographies—Education begun too late— Alexander’s Obstinacy—Astuteness of ‘Dmitri Tolstoi and Pobiedonostseff— Tke Relations of the Tsar and his Ministers—Harold Frederic’s Opinion of the Tsar—Hard Work wasted—Mr. Lowe's Views—The Three Slavophile Principles—Why Peace was imperative—Pobiedonostseff’s Influence—Intolerant Orthodoxy—The Procuratorship of the Holy Synod—Samson Von Himmelstierna's Tribute—Dmitri Tolstoi’s Sage Advice—Ivan Durnovo— The '' Peasant Emperor.”

xii CONTENTS.

CHAPTER X. Pp. 155—192. THE REACTION UNDER ALEXANDER III

The Bureaucracy's Power—Local Self-Government to be Discouraged—The Volost, the Stayschina, and the Ispravunik—Education deprecated among Government Clerks—The System of '' District Chiefs" introduced—Their Duties— Some Instances of the District Chiefs’ Arbitrariness—Stepniak and the Zemstvos —Religious Persecution—The Jews—Their Disabilities—Pobiedonostseff’s Anti-Jewish Campaign—-His Motive, real or pretended—The Jews and the Schools—The Bishop of Cherson and Leo Tolstoi protest—The Duchoborzen —-The Molokanes—The Stundists—Atrocities committed by the Police at Babenzy—Prince Hilkoff’s Letter to Archbishop Ambrosius—Russification and Proselytising-—The Treatment of Roman Catholicsin Poland—Apukhtin’s Prohibition to Deaf-mutes—A London Journal's Views on Russian Religion.

CHAPTER XI. Pp. 193—213. THE RESULTS OF THE REACTION IN ECONOMIC MATTERS

Effects of Emancipation on the Peasants—High Taxation—Ukase in 1889 restricting Migration —Pobiedonostseffs and Dmitri Tolstoi'’s respective Tenets—The Nobility to be Resuscitated—Stepniak on Dmitri Tolstoi's Project—The Bank of Nobility founded in 1886—How its Business was conducted—The Agricultural Bank neglected by the Government—The Peasants burdened by heavy Rates—Crisis in 1891—Leo Tolstoi extorts Official Statement regarding Famine—Vischnegradsky's elusive Figures— The Official Relief Committee and Private Charity —-The Government obliged to Give Way—The Distress in Rural Districts—Usurers and their Practices— The United States and Protection—Effects of Tariffs in Russia—The Rate of Mortality—The Economic Position—The Government's Blindness.

CHAPTER XII. Pp. 214—243. THE REVOLUTIONARY MOVEMENT UNDER ALEXANDER III

A Notable Divergence—Stepniak and the Narodnaia Volia’s Reform Programme—The Moderate Liberals’ Hopes—The Extremists active—Revolutionary Ideas in the “ Services”—Military Conspirators’ fatal Hesitancy— 1884 critical for Nihilism—Abortive Bombs—General] Strialnikoff murdered— “White” Terror versus ‘* Black ''—Stepniak’s Account of various Printingpresses—Opposition more inclined to reunite—Industrial Development favourable to Revolutionary Propagandism—The Reaction and the Unions —Madame Tsebrikoff's Letter, to the Tsar and her subsequent Banishmene— The Prisons congested— Renewed Precautions for the Tsar’s Personal Safety ~—Alexander III. and Finland—The Moskowskia Viedomosti and the Anti-Finnish Movement—-Death of Alexander, October 22nd, 1894—Volkhofsky’s Communication as to projected Constitution—The proposed Semsky Svbor—The Desire for Constitutional Government.

CONTENTS. xili

THE PRESENT ERA.

CHAPTER NII. Pp. 247—25».

THE FIRST YEARS OF THE REIGN OF NICHOLAS IL.

Hopes for Better Times—The New Tsar and an Arrogant Official—Concession to Polish Nobility—General Gurko’s Behaviour at Warsaw—Assurances of Loyalty—No material Change in Ministry—The Wedding Manifesto— Imperial Clemency somewhat disappointing—The Manifesto analysed—The Addresses of the Zemstvos—Nicholas II. replies in plain Terms.

CHAPTER XIV. Pp. 260—310. THE REACTION UNDER NICHOLAS I

Indications of Policy—Severe Censorship—M. Durnovo on Education—The “ Komitet Gramotnosti ’’—The War Minister and the Jews—Collision between Students and Police—The Duchoborzen and Military Duty—Durnovo dismissed—Gorevykin appointed Minister of the Interior—His Policy—Events in 1896—The Tsar’s Coronation—The Chodinsky Disaster and the Tsar's Sympathy—Colonel Ingersoll on the Festivities—Strike in St. Petersburg— Labour Organisation—Strike concluded by Government—Lobanoff appointed Minister for Foreign Affairs—Affray with Students at Vagankovo Cemetery— The Duchoborzen evicted from the Caucasus—The Alcohol Monopoly— Senator Tagantseff and Legal Procedure—The Financial Messenger and the Protective Duties—The real Economic Conditions—Jewish Education in 1897 —The Kasan Congress of Priests—-A new Famine—The Government’s Reply to the Voronesch Zemstvos—Leo Tolstoi’s Letter ve the Abduction of Children -—Promotion of Bogoliepoff and Kuropatkin—Leo Tolstoi on the Voronesch Famine—The Tsar and Universal Peace—His Treatment of the Finns— Bobrikoff given the Command in Finland—An Emigration en Masse—The Police again active in 1898—Prince Imeritinsky on the State of Poland—Strike of Students at St. Petersburg—Vannofsky’s Inquiry—Galitzin’s confidential Dispatch from the Caucasus—The proper Way to treat Armenians—Finnish Petition refused—Gorevykin dismissed—The Russky Trud and the Finance Minister—Sharapoff's Letter to Philipoff—Violence in 1899—Leo Tolstoi and the Holy Synod—The Unreality of Russia’s Prosperity in 1900 explained— ThepTroubles in the Far East and Mobilisation Difficulties—Taxes increased —More Conflicts with Students—Degradation of the Army—Abolition of the “Temporary Regulations’’ demanded—General Kleigels and the Kasan Church Affray—Bogoliepoff murdered—lIll-treatment of Prisoners—Testimony of a Saghalien Doctor—Legal Abuses—Protests from Influential Quarters—Police Raids continued—The Record of Sipiagin’s Ministry.

xIv CONTENTS.

CHAPTER XV. Pp. 311—319. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE REVOLUTIONARY MOVEMENT UNDER NICHOLAS II. a

The Course to be Pursued—The Tsar's Error—The Authoritiesand Progress— Intellectual Development and Bureaucracy—The Jewish Workmen's Union— Riot at Wilna in r901—Disturbance at Kharkoff—Vigorous Measures at St. Petersburg and Moscow—General Effects of the Persecution—Nationalities in the Empire indignant—Moderate Liberals converted into Revolutionaries.

CHAPTER XVI. Pp. 320—341. SUPPLEMENT: THE VON PLEHVE REGIME

Survey of more recent Developments—Distinctions between the Component Parts of the Opposition—Von Plehve’s rise to Power traced— Alliance with Bobrikoff in Finland—Conflict with De Witte and Muravieff— De Witte appoints Committees to discuss Agriculture—De Plehve's Hostility to the Committees—-His Victory over De Witte—His Machinations through Subatoff with regard to Workmen's Unions—His Malignity towards the Jews —Kishineff and Homel—His Russifying Policy—Indignation in Finland— Bobrikoff murdered—The Armenians—Flight of Galitzin from the Caucasus —The Georgians—Poland—Von Plehve and Europe—His Ineptitude—Punitive Measures against Russian Critics—Unrest in the Universities—Von Plehve's Fate—Review of his Policy.

CHAPTER XVII. Pp. 342—353. THE TIME AFTER THE DEATH OF THE MINISTER VON PLEHVE, e

The Japanese War—Vacillation of the Tsar—Opposing Intluences—Sviatopolk Mirski’s Appointment—Liberal Journals speak frankly—Demands for Reform general—Rapprochement between Opposition Parties in 1g04—Preliminary Conference in Paris— Result of Negotiations—Sviatopolk Mirski and the Zemstvos—The Grand Dukes intervene—The Supremacy of Sergius— Active Propagandism continues—Father Gapon—A Peaceful Procession— “ Viadimir’s Day "—-The Outrage on the Grand Duke Sergius.

CHAPTER XVIII. Pp. 354-366. THE REVOLUTIONARY FORCES—THE CHANCES OF THE AGITATION FOR FREEDOM

The Difference of Numbers—Powerful Forces on the Side of Freedom— The Spread of Education—The Revolutionary Movement and the Upper

CONTENTS. xv

Classes—The Preponderance of Country People—Nationalisation of Land incorporated in Revolutionary Programme—A Last and Terrible Reserve— Foreign Nationalities—Finland’s Position—Principal Parties and Organisations—The Tsar's Military Power set in the Balance—A Vicious Circle—

Unison and Energy—-An Agrarian Revolt probable—Nicholas I., or Nicholas the Last ?

THE RUSSIAN REVOLUTIONARY MOVEMENT.

Chapter I. The First Revolutionary Outbreak In Russia

THE seed of the social evolution in Russia which in our day has brought Tsardom to the verge of revolution must be considered as having been sown by none other than Tsar Peter the Reformer, or the Great, as he is styled. He it was who by force flung the then thoroughly barbarous Russian Empire into the stream of Western civilisation, and with fire and sword compelled it to flow onward until European ideas and culture had taken far too deep a root for them to be ever again eradicated. It was a revolution from above, by which Peter had not the slightest intention of altering or introducing any change into the absolutist form of his government. Nevertheless, he set the ball rolling which, without his will or knowledge, broke down the barriers that had maintained Russia from time immemorial as a more than semi-Oriental autocracy, into which the long ascendency of the Tartars had transformed it. There existed originally, even in Russia, a right of the people to make its voice heard in the councils of the land; but this *right was abolished by the Tartar khans. They forced the mass of the people into a condition of slavish subjection to their masters, and the Russian Tsars became their heirs at a later period. That the love of freedom and the demand

RR. B for self-government existed in Russia at that time eis abundantly proved by the free military republics established by Russians in the Ukraine, which, after countless struggles for liberty and independence, were finally compelled by Catharine II.to submit to the Russian autocracy; for it was not until her time that serfdom was first introduced among the earlier Zaporoges.

Tsar Peter was quite as masterful a despot as any of his predecessors, though he was at the same time sufficiently openminded to recognise the fact that he would never be able to satisfy the insatiable lust for dominion which animated him against his Western neighbours, unless he succeeded in spreading among his own people the higher culture possessed by those neighbours in all material matters. Had he but considered that he was thereby opening the door of his empire to the intellectual influences which ultimately led to the downfall of absolute monarchy in all the States of Europe, he world perhaps have pondered a little longer before he used his sovereign power to break down the wall that had hitherto divided his people from the rest of Europe. But his penetration was not so keen; it was impossible that it should be.

After him Catherine II. helped the most to propagate European ideas in Russia. She had just as little real intention as Peter I. of introducing free institutions into her empire; but that did not hinder her from courting the founders of the revolutionary movement in France, the encyclopzdists, approving their doctrines, inviting liberal-minded foreigners to her court, and openly, by word and deed, displaying her contempt for the principles, both social and religious, on which the Russian autocracy was based. Her example wa8 by no means without influence on Russian society. The new doctrines and ideas spread very rapidly among the upper classes, and wherever the seed so cast fell on the soil of genuine intelligence and education it sprouted and struck roots, from which new shoots have been continually springing to.the present day. In the Russia of that time, however, there was not the remotest symptom of any ideas of a revolutionary character or of a tendency hostile to the government. The so-called revolutions which frequently occurred were nothing more or less than Palace revolutions, court intrigues and conspiracies against the person of the ruler, their sole object being to set another equally absolute sovereign in the place of the one dethroned. It was not until after the great French revolution that people in Russia first began to think more or less of the possibility of a form of government other than that of an autocracy ; but there was no attempt made to put into actual practice the theories which found favour in enlightened circles until after the defeat of the French army of invasion.

The titanic struggle against Napoleon and his final defeat produced an intellectual ferment in Russia such as had never occurred before. Russian troops and officers came into closer contact with western Europeans, by whose side they fought, and with whom they marched through Europe to the French capital. Here, as in the rest of Europe, many changes had taken place.» Anewspirit dominated, and a complete transformation in the domain of thought and study had occurred during the years succeeding the revolution without destroying the most important results of the latter. For not even the Napoleonic despotism had been able to obliterate the traces of the powerful movement that had passed over the land; not even the high-handed Napoleon himself had ventured to do anything but utilise for his own ends the fruits and results of this movement, while in other parts of Europe his onslaughts, far from destroying the harvest of the revolution, only brought it more rapidly to maturity.

B2

In Germany the Russians had an opportunity of seeirfg what a people, in spite of a thoroughly bad government, could do in the defence of their country and in getting rid of the foreign, oppressive, and dishonourable tutelage under which the kingdom and its rulers existed. The Russians, who took note of all the social conditions of the countries they passed through, soon saw, as others had, that the German nation was indebted to the German League of Virtue and the leaders of that mighty popular movement for the possibility.-and power of regenerating and rehabilitating their country.

In France they contemplated at first hand the consequences and effects of the liberation of the nation by the revolution. They beheld a people who had been brought to the verge of ruin and despair by a system of government which resembled that of Russia in all essentials, but who, spontaneously and unorganised, had risen against the oppressor ready to risk the only thing they could really call their own, their life, in the fight for human rights and existence: a people whom despair had rendered irresistible, victorious, and who had for all time destroyed absolutism in their country, and who, in spite of inexperience, serious blunders, and excesses, had succeeded in building a new form of government on the ruins of the old one; a people who, in their struggle against practically the whole of Europe, had developed their national strength so far as actually to bring Europe to their feet a few years later, and, even in their delirium of victory and their boundless admiration for their great leader, yet knew how to preserve intact the most valuable result of the revolution, the freedom of the masses of the people and the right to live thei own life.

Such examples could not fail to exercise a powerful ‘influence on thinking people, of whom there were many among the officers of the Russian troops. Their own land, their own nation, lay trodden under the heel of an autocracy ands bureaucracy that’ made all progress impossible. The vast majority of the people consisted of serfs, outcast slaves, \ possessed of no other civil right but that of fighting and dying for their country in her hour of danger. The privileged upper classes had all the rights and, with but few exceptions, abused their power, abandoning themselves to a life of luxury and enjoyment ; and at the head of all was the Tsar, the autocrat, whose unlimited authority was always, in a great if not the greatest measure, wielded by favourites and their puppets, first of all for their own benefit, but very rarely for the advantage of the people.

The idea of the possibility of bringing about such a change as the introduction into Russia of legal and well-ordered conditions, liberty for the people and equal rights for all, germinated in many minds during the long stay of the Russian armies in western Europe. Imbued with enthusiasm for what they had learned and seen with their own eyes, people began to dream of nothing less than the overthrow of the autocracy, and the conversion, at one stroke, of Russia into a republic where untrammelled freedom should rule and institutions be established similarly as in France.

After the return of the troops it became quite the fashion in the higher ranks of society to conspire against the sovereign Government. The liberal tendencies which Alexander I. displayed during the first period of his reign had, to a very great extent, contributed still further to promote the theoretical liberalism which had its origin in the reign of Catperine. Alexander’s liberalism, however, changed later Yo its exact opposite in the shape of a re-action which became ever more acute the deeper he fell under the influence of the unworthy Araktscheieff; this, however, only served to exasperate the feeling of impatience and growing discontent, more or less unconsciously present in the minds of most people.

This discontent assumed a concrete shape after the return of the army from France. It was expressly directed against the system itself, against the autocratic form of government. In all those circles where national affairs were matters of ’ interest the questions of reforms, improvements, representation, and constitution were eagerly discussed. Every salon in St. Petersburg became a kind of hotbed of conspiracy, where far-reaching projects were handled in a manner which, from the Russian point of view, came very near to high treason.

The great majority of these people hardly ever thought seriously of translating their words and thoughts into action, though besides these amateur conspirators there were others who were firmly resolved to proceed further. The greatest enthusiasts set themselves to work, immediately on their return home, at scheming plans of revolution and forming unions and associations to carry these plans into execution. The German League of Virtue served as the chief pattern for the organisations which were started, their principal power lying in the army, although their members included _ many others than those belonging to the military profession. - As early as 182q there were several such societies in active - existence, the most prominent among them being the so-called Association of Welfare, and all of them with the same clearly expressed object in view, that of wholly or partially changing the existing form of government either by peaceful or violent methods.

At the same time there was a great divergence of opingon between the different groups, so that at the very outset it was found impossible to come to an agreement on a common programme of action. Even in the Welfare Association two sharply opposed sets of opinions soon asserted themselves.

The adherents of one party, the moderates, desired merely to assist and support the Government by means of the -legal machinery at their disposal, and to induce it to adopt further measures conducive to the interest and advantage of the people, so that all abuses might be gradually abolished, improvements and reforms carried out, and the system of government modified step by step. The representatives of the radicals saw, however, that neither the Government nor its tools could be improved by partial reforms passed on legitimate lines, because the dominating system could and would neutralise their effect. For this reason they insisted that the system itself which kept the majority of the people in a state of illegal bondage must first of all be totally altered and substituted by another form of government which would permit of the establishment of real and lasting reforms. The irreconcilableness displayed by both these leading parties became at last so notorious that the ‘“‘ Welfare Association” was dissolved at a meeting held in February, 1821. In its place two new associations, ‘the Northern” and “the Southern,” were at once inaugurated by the more progressive members of the old society, both of them with a much more radical programme. The Southern Association was centred in Tulchin, the headquarters of the Southern Army, and the Northern was settled in St. Petersburg.

Both were undilutedly revolutionary in their objects, which consisted of nothing less than the organisation of a far-reaching revolt which should replace the irresponsible autocracy by a democratic and popular form of govern-

- ment. It is true that the leaders of the Northern Associatiop limited their plans at first to a constitutional monarchy as the end to be attained, whereas the Southerners demanded - a republic; but both of them were equally revolutionary in so far as they had for their immediate object the destruction of the existing form of government. At last, however, they came to an agreement on one point, namely, that if the revolt succeeded the crown was to be offered to Alexander I. as a constitutional monarch, but that if he rejected the offer the entire dynasty was to be removed and a federal republic proclaimed. In the Northern Association as well the notion of a republic gained more ground at a later period, thanks to the greater energy and activity displayed by the more radical Southerners, by whom, in fact, most of the practical preparations for the revolt were made.

The guiding spirit of this Southern Association was Colonel Pestel, commander of the Viatka regiment and adjutant to Field-Marshal Prince Witgenstein, the chief of the Southern Army. Other men closely attached to Pestel and his strongest supporters in the revolutionary association were Uschnevsky, the cool-headed and discreet quartermaster-general of the Southern Army; the energetic and laborious Bestuscheff-Rjumin; Generals Fonvizin and Prince Volkhonsky ; Colonels Artamon Muravieff, commanding the regiment of Akhtyr Hussars, Narischkin, chief of the Taroutino regiment, Schweikowsky, chief of the Saratoff regiment, and Abramoff and Tisenhausen, commanders of the Poltava and Kasan regiments. Among the most zealous members were the two brothers, the Lieutenant-Colonels Sergius and Matvei Muravieff-Apostol.

The Southern Association was in intimate connection with another secret organisation known as the ‘‘ United Slavs,” the existence of which had been discovered by Bestuscheff-Rjumin, and which in its turn had also close relations with officers of different ranks in the Southern Army. Bestuscheff- Rjumin had, moreover, established a system of co-operation with the Polish secret societies in Warsaw, where revolutionary schemes were also being worked out, although really with the sole purpose of freeing Poland from the