lecture iii-第4章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


proprietor　was　too　well　pleased　to　see　his　yearly　revenue
guaranteed　by　the　unpaid　service　of　the　villeins；　to　meddle　with
their　internal　arrangements。　The　villeins　were　accordingly
allowed　to　choose　their　own　executive　officers；　to　have　their
elders；　their　〃good　men；〃　or　judicial　assistants；　and　to
apportion　taxes　and　arrange　the　land　ownership　at　their　regular
meetings；　or　folkmotes。　Such　being　the　case；　I　see　no　reason　why
the　agrarian　communism　practised　by　the　Russian　peasantry　should
be　much　affected　by　their　loose　dependence　upon　the　landlord；　at
least；　before　the　time　when　serfdom　was　completely　established
and　the　peasant　was　prevented　from　removing　from　the　manor。
　　　　The　general　characteristic　of　the　old　Russian　community　may
be　given　in　few　words：　it　was　a　kind　of　ownership；　based　on　the
idea　that　the　true　proprietor　of　the　land　was　none　other　than　the
commune。　The　rights　of　the　commune　to　the　soil　occupied　by　the
individual　households　appears　in　the　indivisibility　of　the　waste
and　forest　lands；　and　in　the　fact　that　vacant　shares　are
regularly　disposed　of　by　the　commune；　and　that　nobody　is　allowed
to　occupy　a　piece　of　ground　lying　within　the　limits　of　the
village　common；　unless　he　is　authorised　by　the　local　authorities。
Arable　land　and　meadows　are；　as　a　rule；　in　the　hands　of　private
households；　which　pay　taxes　and　perform　manorial　labour　in　direct
proportion　to　the　amount　of　land　they　own。　This　ownership　does
not　suppose　the　existence　of　certain　limits　which　nobody　is
allowed　to　infringe。　It　implies　only　the　right　to　have　a　definite
share　in　the　three　fields；　which　constitute　the　agricultural　area
of　the　village。　The　shares　are　not　equal；　but　differ　in　direct
proportion　to　the　payments　which　the　household　is　called　upon　to
make；　partly　to　the　State；　and　partly　to　the　lord　of　the　manor。
Periodical　redistributions　are　unknown；　and　no　mention　is　made　of
the　run…rig　system　of　some　modern　English　and　Irish　manors。
　　　　Thus　constituted；　the　old　Russian　village　community　appears
to　be　very　like　that　of　medieval　England　with　its　system　of　open
fields；　its　hides　and　virgates。　It　may　be　also　compared　to　the
German　mark；　so　far　as　the　mark　is　composed　of　a　set　of　villages
subdivided　into　units　partly　financial；　partly　territorial；
called　Hufen；　and　securing　to　their　private　holders；　like　the
English　virgates；　the　right　to　have　a　distinct　share　in　the
arable　fields　and　in　the　meadows　of　the　village。
　　　　Now　that　we　are　aware　of　the　peculiar　features　of　the
medieval　village　community；　let　us　ascertain　the　reasons　which
have　produced　a　complete　revolution　in　its　interior　organisation
by　the　introduction　of　the　principle　of　equal　division　of　the
soil　among　its　individual　members；　and　the　system　of　periodical
allotments　of　ground　in　order　to　secure　this　equality。
　　　　Two　facts　seem　to　have　contributed　to　this　result；　the　first
was　the　increase　of　population；　which；　as　we　have　already　shown
in　the　instance　of　Little　Russian　communes；　sooner　or　later
induces　the　majority　of　persons　holding　small　shares　to　force　the
rest　to　proceed　to　a　redistribution　of　the　soil。　The　other　fact
is　the　replacing　of　the　land…tax　by　a　sort　of　capitation　tax；　and
the　introduction　of　the　principle　of　mutual　responsibility；　in
matters　of　taxation。　The　first　of　these　causes；　increase　of
population；　remained　inoperative　as　long　as　the　peasant　retained
the　liberty　of　removing　freely　from　one　place　to　another。　Much
ground　was　lying　waste。　Landowners　had　no　other　thought　than　how
to　induce　new　colonists　to　settle　on　it；　with　this　end　in　view
they　regularly　freed　them　from　all　taxes　for　a　period　of　three
years。　Those　of　the　villagers；　who　thought　themselves　sacrificed
to　the　interests　of　their　neighbours　could；　therefore；　easily
find　the　land　they　wanted　and　that　under　very　favourable
conditions。　They　had　only　to　leave　the　village　they　inhabited　and
seek　for　new　homes；　either　on　the　still　unoccupied　steppes　or　on
the　manors　possessed　by　the　crown；　the　church；　or　the　landed
aristocracy。
　　　　　Such　was　no　longer　the　case　when　serfdom　became　a　general
rule；　and　the　right　of　free　migration　was　refused　to　the　peasant。
This　happened　during　the　period　which　extends　from　the　end　of　the
sixteenth　to　that　of　the　seventeenth　century。　Two　decades　later
followed　the　great　change　in　matters　of　taxation　when　Peter　the
Great　abolished　the　land…tax；　and　introduced　the　capitation…tax。
This　happened　in　the　year　1719。　Mutual　responsibility　of　persons
belonging　to　the　same　village　was　introduced；　and　both　landlords
and　peasants　were　allowed　to　take　preventive　measures　against
those　who　might　seek　to　escape　the　obligation　of　paying　the
personal　tax　by　withdrawing　from　their　habitations。
　　　　When　this　revolution　was　accomplished　and　each　household
began　to　be　taxed；　not　according　to　the　quantity　of　land　it
owned；　but　according　to　the　number　of　persons　attributed　to　it　in
the　taxation　returns；　the　grossest　injustice　would　necessarily
arise　if　the　soil　remained　in　the　hands　of　its　then　holders。
Complaints　were　therefore　made；　and　petitions　addressed；　in　which
the　old　division　of　the　village　area　was　declared　to　be
obnoxious；　and　an　equality　of　shares　was　demanded　as　a　necessary
condition　for　the　regular　fulfilment　by　each　village　of　its
financial　obligations　towards　the　State。　An　instance　of　such　a
request　is　that　presented　by　the　peasants　of　the　village　of
Petrovsk　in　the　year　1725；　in　which　they　ask　to　have　an　equal
share　of　land　allotted　to　each　member　of　the　commune；　all　other
kinds　of　allotment　being　contrary　to　justice。　Similar　demands
must　have　been　made　repeatedly　before　the　members　of　the
legislative　commission；　convened　by　Catherine　the　Second；
received　orders　to　protest　against　the　requirements　of　those　who
wanted　all　the　land　of　a　village　to　be　distributed　in　equal
shares　according　to　the　number　of　souls；　notwithstanding　that
these　lands　had　been　fertilised　by　the　work　and　private　industry
of　the　first　settlers。*
　　　　For　the　reasons　just　mentioned；　a　redistribution　of　the　land
was　made　at　least　every　time　the　Government　revised　its　taxation
returns；　such　revision　occurring　every　nineteenth　year。　It　was
felt　necessary　to　establish　a　direct　relation　between　the　number
of　persons　living　in　a　household；　and　the　amount　of　land
possessed　by　the　household；　and　the　fact；　that　the　actual　number
of　such　persons　did　not　correspond　to　those　enumerated　in　the
taxation　returns；　even　after　the　lapse　of　a　few　years；　led　some
communes　to　have　recourse　to　more　frequent　divisions。　It　is　in
this　way　that　we　may　explain　how　it　was　brought　about；　that
redistributions　came　to　be　made　every　sixth　or　even　every　third
year。　We　hear　of　no　yearly　distribution　because　the　three　field
system；　still　prevailing　in　Russia；　required　at　least　a　three
years'　rotation　of　the　crops。　It　was　not　always　the　country
people　who　took　the　initiative　in　an　equal　re…allotment　of　the
soil　according　to　the　number　of　persons　taxed。　Mr　Zabelin　has
brought　forward　instances；　in　which　such　allotments　were　made　on
the　initiative　of　the　lord　of　the　manor；　and　Mr　Schimanov　has
produced　a　curious　case；　in　which　such　re…allotment　was　made　by
the　direct　order　of　a　provincial　Governor；　who　thought　that
justice　required　that　the　number　of　shares；　owned　by　each
household；　should　correspond　to　the　number　of　souls　composing　it。
This　happened　not　longer　ago　than　the　second　half　of　the
seventeenth　century　in　the　Government　of　Kharkov；　where
inequality　of　shares　had　been　up　to　that　time　the　general　rule。
It　is　only　by　a　general　agreement　between　the　people　and　the
authorities　that　we　can　explain　the　rapid　expansion　of　the
present　system。　We　do　not　find　any　trace　of　such　redistributions
before　the　end　of　the　seventeenth　century；　when　the　borough　of
Schouia　began　to　make　new　allotments　of　ground　every　ten　years。*
　　　　Having　now　finished　with　the　past　history　of　the　Russian
village　commune；　we　shall　proceed　to　the　study　of　its　modern
arrangements。　These　have　formed　the　subject　of　very　curious
investigations；　which　have　been　carried　on　during　the　last　few
years　by　a　number　of　young　Russian　economists；　employed　by　the
elective　councils　or　〃zemstva〃　of　our　provinces。　Their　work　will
probably　be　as　valuable　to　coming　generations；　as　that　performed
in　England　a　century　ago　by　Messrs　Sinclair　and　Marshall；　or　as
that；　which　in　our　own　day　is　still　going　on　in　India　under　the
enlightened　supervision　of　the　Indian　Settlement　Commissioners。　I
shall　make　free　use　of　the　rich　material；　which　these　skilful　and
untiring　workers　have　accumulated；　in　order　to　present　to　you　a
picture　of　the　prevailing　system；　the　mir　or　village　community　of
to…day。
　　　　According　to　the　law　of　emancipation　promulgated　the　19th
February　1861；　the　peasantry　continue　to　possess　an　organisation
quite　distinct　from　that　of　the　other　classes　of　society。　The
ancient　〃volost〃　（or　mark）　is　preserved　or　rather　revived；　and
the　villages　are；　as　they　were　centuries　ago；　the　administrative
units　of　which　it　is　formed。　The　volost　and　the　village　have
alike　their　elected　authorities；　the　right　of　election　being
based　on　a　kind　of　universal　suffrage；　exercised　by　all　the
grown…up　men　of　the　community。　But；　differing　in　this　from　the
French　〃commune；〃　and　the　sections　composing　it；　the　Russian
volost　and　village　accord　no　right　of　suffrage　to　persons
belonging　to　any　other　social　position　than　that　of　peasant
（krestianine；　a　word；　the　first　meaning　of　which　was　Christian）。
A　merchant　or　a　nobleman　may　reside　for　years　in　a　village；　he
will　not　thereby　acquire　any　right　to　meddle　with　its　internal
administration。　To　explain　the　reason　of　such　an　anomaly；　we　must
keep　in　view　the　circumstances　under　which　the　law　of　1861　was
promulgated。　its　chief　purpose　was　to　liberate　the　serfs　from
their　dependence　on　the　landed　aristocracy。　The　squire；　the
〃pomeschick；〃　was　the　enemy　against　whom　they　had　to　fight；　and
it　was　feared　that　he　could　easily　regain　the　influence；　which
had　lasted　for　centuries；　if　he　and　the　persons　in　his　service
were　allowed　to　have　a　vote　in　communal　concerns。　It　was
therefore　to　prevent　a　practical　restoration　of　feudal　power；
that　the　upper　classes　were　debarred　from　all　interference　in
village　matters。　But　the　legislators　forgot　the　dangers；　which
arise　from　the　artificial　isolation　of　an　ill…educated　class；
both　for　itself　and　for　the　other　orders　of　society。　I　know　no
country；　in　which　the　enlightened　classes　have　so　little
opportunity　of　exercising　that　moral　influence；　without　which　no
social　progress　can　be　really　achieved。　Not　only　the　squire；　be
he　a　nobleman　or　a　merchant；　but　also　the　parish　priest　（the
pope）；　are　excluded　by　law　from　the　right　to　vote　in　the　village
assembly。　Questions　concerning　public　instruction　and　public
health　are　daily　discussed　and　settled　by　illiterate　men；　very
often　to　the　injury　of　the　community；　without　any　reference　to
the　wishes　and　intentions　of　the　more　enlightened　inhabitants；
whose　interference　in　such　cases　would　be　considered　a　direct
infringement　of　the　law。　This　is　certainly　a　great　wrong；　a　wrong
which　is　clearly　seen；　both　by　society　and　by　Government。　The
absent