cilien-Geschichte) (Freiburg 1851-73); Hergenröther, Monumenta Græca ad Photium pertinentia (Regensburg 1869); id., Photius, Patriarch von Constantinopel, sein Leben und seine Schriften) (3 vols., ib. 1867–69); Horton, 'Students' History of the Greek Church' (New York 1902); Howard, "The Schism Between the Oriental and Western Churches' (London 1892); Malitzkii, P., 'Handbook of the History of the Russian Church (Petrograd 1898, 1902); Neale, History of the Holy Eastern Church) (5 vols., London 1850-73); Pierling's Works on the Relations Between the Tsar and the Popes; Palmieri, A., 'La chiesa russa (Florence 1908); Röhan, 'L'Eglise orthodoxe gréco-russe (Brussels 1897); Schaff, Creeds of Christendom' (4th ed., New York 1905); Silbernagel, Verfassung und gegenwärtiger Bestand sämmtlicher Kirchen des Orients' (Landshut 1865); Dean Stanley, 'History of the Eastern Church) (London 1861); Tozer, The Church and the Eastern Empire' (London 1888). A. PALMIERI, Washington, D. C.

11. GOVERNMENT AND POLITICAL PARTIES. Many and varied are the definitions given of Russia's form of government. The difficulty of properly defining or characterizing it is due, in large measure, to its changing and changeable nature not only since the Great Revolution, but even before that event. If one were to treat the subject historically and adequately, at least five separate stages should be noted in the evolution of the Russian administrative machine. There was,

first, the pre-Mongolian free tribal government, which was decidedly democratic; then came the long period of Eastern despotism introduced by Russia's Mongolian conquerors, which destroyed every element of self-government already attained; next followed another long period, ushered in by Peter the Great, during which Oriental absolutism was considerably tempered by Occidental democracy; then, again, the revolutionary demonstrations of 1905-06 brought a short period of quasi-constitutional government in which much real progress toward democratic institutions was made; and, finally, the two revolutions of 1917, the short-lived one of March and its more vigorous successor of October inaugurated many startling experiments in class government, with seemingly disastrous results upon the Russian body politic.

Limitations of space preclude any such extended treatment of this interesting subject. For present purposes, therefore, we shall adopt a simpler, if less scientific, scheme. Generally speaking, Russia was an absolute monarchy up to 1905, a limited monarchy from 1905 to 1917, a provisional democracy for some eight months thereafter and a proletarian dictatorship since the Bolshevik coup d'état. Considering the last two forms of government as but different phases of the transitional period, we may continue this brief study of Russia's government under three heads: (1) As it was under absolutism prior to the so-called revolution of 190506; (2) as it became during the quasi-constitutional period of 1905-17; and (3) as it has been in the present period of transition.

Under Absolutism (to 1905). The government machine of imperial Russia was cumbersome, complex and very inefficient cumber

41

For

some because too centralized, complex because insufficiently specialized, and inefficient because irresponsible. Not only did the regular administrative functions (legislative, executive, judiciary) overlap, as we shall see presently, but no consistent demarcation existed between national, state, and local government. these and other reasons Russia's political institutions lagged centuries behind the times and were long the laughing stock of the civilized world. In imperial days, however, absolutism, with all its concomitants, was considered necessary for holding in line the numerous and diverse racial, social, and religious elements that composed the colossal Russian Empire.

era

The supreme authority in autocratic Russia was the tsar (from the Latin "Cæsar"), an absolute hereditary monarch, part of whose title was "Tsar of All the Russias." In him were vested all legislative, executive, and judicial powers, which, until the constitutional above referred to, were exercised without let or hindrance from any legal source. There were, however, three departments of state, composed of functionaries appointed by the tsar, and one special department- the Holy Synod which helped the monarch to administer his vast empire.

-

The oldest of these was the Senate, created by Peter the Great in 1711 and reorganized by Alexander I in 1802. Its members were all appointed by the tsar and held the rank of Privy Councillors. Being the highest judicial institution of the empire, the Senate (a) heard appeals in civil and criminal cases, (b) passed on the legality of new legislation and (c) held disciplinary court for officials from the various branches of government. For purposes of expedition, this large body of state was divided into six separate departments, two of them acting as courts of appeal, two exercising administrative jurisdiction, and the rest supervising the collection of taxes, the appointment of government officers, the preservation of the archives, etc.

Another important body concerned with imperial administration was the Imperial Council, which exercised only advisory legislative authority in pre-constitutional times and consisted of 196 members, half the number (including the president and the vice-president) appointed by the tsar and half elected for nine years. As its function was greatly modified by law in 1905, we shall refer to this legislative branch later.

The Council of Ministers, composed of the 12 ministers of state, appointed and removable by the tsar, was a third great organ of imperial administration. Representing all the various ministries the ministries of Foreign Affairs, Finance, War, Navy, Justice, Education, Commerce and Industry, Ways of Communication, Internal Affairs, Agriculture, Imperial Court and Government Control-the Council of Ministers, or the Cabinet Council, was by far the most important executive institution in monarchial Russia.

For administrative purposes Russia was divided into governments (guberni), provinces (oblasti) and territories (okrugi). If there were such a thing as state rights in imperial Russia, the governments might be said to correspond to the American States. The resemblance is closer, however, in the case of the territorial divisions. Before the World War,

42

if not at the time the last tsar was deposed, Russia had 98 governments, 21 provinces and two territories. The governments, varying in size and population, were themselves divided into districts (úyezdi), which, in turn, were subdivided into still smaller administrative units called counties (utchástki). All these divisions and subdivisions run into the thousands, and were not sufficiently graded or standardized. The governments were the more central and more populated sections of the empire, most of them lying within European Russia; while the provinces, all but one of which lay in the remoter parts of the country (Siberia, Caucasia and central Asia), were inhabited by the less civilized and more nomadic elements. Every government or province had a governor (qubernator) as chief administrative officer, who, in the case of the provinces, was generally also the chief military commander. The duties and powers of the Russian governor under the monarchial régime included regulations for safeguarding public order, control over all the administrative offices, supervision of all government officials and general oversight over all local government institutions, such as the Zemstvos, etc. In the exercise of these various functions the governor would have the assistance of a board of administration, over which he presided.

as

Such semblance of self-government monarchial Russia enjoyed was represented by the Zemstvo (q.v.), a territorial assembly which received its official status in 1864, but which has had its powers and functions modified several times since. This elective body has had and to some extent still has-charge of the provincial administration, which began with the village council (Mir), the lowest and earliest form of communal self-government in Russia and not unlike the New England town meeting; gathered authority in the canton (Vólost), representing a number of villages, sometimes as many as 30; and culminated in the provincial Zemstvo, a combined organization of all the district Zemstvos. Both assemblies elected a standing executive committee (Zémskaya Upráva) consisting of four or five paid officials, which carried on the work of provincial government from the construction of public roads, the prevention of cattle disease and the maintenance of primary schools, to the administration of charity, the development of trade and agriculture, the improvement of sanitary conditions and the promotion of mutual insurance and other co-operative enterprises. District Zemstvos consisted of from 60 to 65 members and met annually oftener if necessary and the governor permitted. The latter, too, exercised the power of veto over such Zemstvos resolutions as incurred his (or his superiors') displeasure.

The Municipal Dumas were town councils presided over by a mayor (golová) and constituted of a few elected officials, who exercised general supervision of municipal affairs. Since 1870 these dumas copied the administrative organization and methods of the Zemstvos, but their powers were considerably reduced in 1894.

Under the Quasi-constitution (1905-17).— The tsar's manifesto of 1905 and the famous "Fundamental Laws" which followed it suddenly changed Russia's form of government theoretically and practically. The autocratic

authority of the tsar became more limited through the introduction of a new representative assembly (The Imperial Duma) and the extension of the powers of an old one (The Imperial Council). The emperor still retained his former executive powers, but in the field of legislation he was henceforth to reckon with the two assemblies just mentioned, which became Russia's legislative institutions. The new principle of government thus introduced transformed Russia from an unlimited to a limited monarchy and fairly started her on her way toward representative, constitutional govern

ment.

The two legislative assemblies created in 1905-06 suggested, but did not quite resemble, the bicameral parliamentary institutions of Western countries. The Imperial Council, changed by law from an advisory to a legislative body, was the Upper House; the Duma (q.v.), the Lower. Both houses could initiate legislation, vote on the government budget and make certain recommendations and interpellations; but the Duma was debarred from exercising its authority in matters pertaining to the imperial family and the war and naval departments (including their respective courts). Moreover, the Upper House could throw out any bills or legislation passed by the Duma, while all legislation must receive the sanction of the Senate, the juridical institution retained from absolutist days, and be approved by the tsar before becoming law. Finally, while no legislation could be enacted without the Duma and the Imperial Council, yet the tsar retainedand frequently exercised the right of issuing certain proclamations (ukázy) and of authorizing sundry emergency expenditures, especially in case of war, and more especially when the Duma, which he could dissolve at will, was not in session.

Apart from the legislative control left to the tsar by the so-called Constitution, he retained supreme authority in nearly all executive and judicial matters. He still had the sole power to appoint and dismiss all his ministers, to direct foreign affairs, proclaim martial law, command the military and naval forces, and to do many other things too numerous to mention. In addition to his old powers, the "Fundamental Laws" gave the tsar the right to convene, adjourn, and prorogue both houses of the newly established "Parliament," to dismiss the members elect of the Upper House, to veto any legislation passed by both houses, and to confirm or set aside verdicts of the criminal courts.

With all that, the government of imperial Russia under the charter loosely called "a constitution" was surely, if slowly, assuming democratic form. The creation of the Duma gave Russia her first experience with responsible, representative government, an experience which meant much for her political education and emancipation.

In the Period of Transition (1917- ).— The Great Revolution of 1917, the revolution which dethroned the last tsar and ended monarchial rule in Russia, left the administrative government temporarily in the hands of a revolutionary committee appointed by the last Duma and presided over by its president, Rodzianko. Soon this committee, which was the sole