lecture iv-第4部分

快捷操作: 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! 如果本书没有阅读完，想下次继续接着阅读，可使用上方 "收藏到我的浏览器" 功能 和 "加入书签" 功能！


subscribed　a　sort　of　contract　by　which　he　took　upon　himself　the
obligation　of　preserving　the　rights　of　those　over　whom　he　was
called　to　rule。　These　very　curious　documents；　known　under　the
name　of　〃riad；〃　have　unfortunately　been　preserved　in　only　one　of
the　Russian　principalities；　that　of　Novgorod；　　a　fact　which　has
induced　many　scholars　to　believe　that　this　right　of　covenanting
with　the　duke　was　limited　to　this　Northern　principality。
Professor　Sergievitch；the　well…known　Professor　of　Legal　history
in　the　University　of　St。　Petersburg；　was　the　first　to　prove　by　a
considerable　number　of　quotations　from　Russian　chronicles；　that
covenants　like　that　of　Novgorod　were　known　all　over　Russia。　More
than　once　mention　is　made　of　a　prince　securing　the　throne　by　a
compromise　with　the　men　of　Kiev　（s　liudmi　Kieva　outverdisia）。
These　compacts　or　covenants　between　prince　and　people；　so　far　as
they　are　known　to　us　by　the　few　examples　among　the　archives　of
Novgorod；　were　a　kind　of　constitutional　charter　securing　to　the
people　the　free　exercise　of　their　political　rights；　such　as　the
right　of　the　folkmote　to　discuss　public　affairs　and　to　elect　the
ruler　of　the　State。　This　latter　right　had　been　already　guaranteed
to　Novgorod　by　a　general　assembly　of　Russian　dukes　held　in　1196。
We　read　in　the　text　of　the　decisions　come　to　by　this　princely
congress；　〃All　the　dukes　recognise　the　liberty　of　Novgorod　to
choose　her　ruler　wherever　she　likes。〃　Other　constitutional
restraints　on　princely　power　are　　no　declaration　of　war　without
〃Novgorod's　word〃；　no　foreigner　to　be　nominated　to　the　post　of
provincial　governor　（volostel）；　no　public　official　to　be
dismissed　without　legal　cause；　acknowledged　to　be　such　by　the
decision　of　a　Court　of　law。　Thus　the　principle　according　to　which
most　English　officials　hold　office　〃during　good　behaviour〃　was
already　recognised　in　Russian　principalities　in　the　middle　of　the
thirteenth　century。　This　efficient　mode　of　securing　the
independence　and　dignity　of　public　officials　has　been　completely
abolished　in　later　days　under　the　Tzars　and　Emperors；　although
once　more　in　1863　its　necessity　was　admitted　by　the　legal
enactments　of　Alexander　II。　Unfortunately　no　attention　is　any
longer　paid　to　the　promises　given　to　this　effect　by　the　codes　of
civil　and　criminal　procedure；　and　many　a　judge　has　been　removed
in　recent　times　by　a　simple　order　of　the　Minister　of　Public
Justice。
　　　　Returning　to　the　constitutional　guarantees　secured。　by　the
new　ruler　to　his　future　subjects；　I　must　point　out　that　those
already　mentioned　seem　to　have　been　common　to　all　the　different
principalities　of　Russia。　The　same　cannot　be　said　of　the
following　two：　first；　the　obligation　to　judge　nobody　without　the
assistance　of　a　special　officer；　called　the　posadnik；　and
secondly；　the　right　of　the　folkmote　to　choose　this　official；　a
right　which　first　appeared　in　the　beginning　of　the　twelfth
century。　These　exceptions　once　made；　we　have　the　right　to　say
that　the　compacts　entered　into　by　the　people　of　Novgorod　with
their　future　ruler；　give　us　a　fair　idea　of　the　relative　strength
of　the　prince　and　of　the　popular　assembly　all　over　Russia。
　　　　Our　review　of　the　agreement　signed　by　the　prince　on　his
accession　to　the　throne　has　already　reveaLed　to　us　some　of　the
functions　of　the　veche。　Questions　of　war　and　peace　were　regularly
decided　by　it。　No　war　could　be　begun　but　with　the　consent　of　the
people；　because；　in　the　absence　of　a　regular　army；　the　prince
could　levy　no　other　force　but　that　of　the　militia。　Treaties　of
peace　and　alliance　were　also　signed　in　the　name　of　the　prince　and
people；　as　may　be　seen　from　the　following　words　used　in　the
treaty　of　Igor　with　the　Byzantine　empire　in　945；　〃This　treaty　has
been　concluded　by　the　Grand　Duke　of　Russia；　by　all　the　dukes
whatsoever　and　by　all　the　people　of　the　Russian　lands。〃
Sometimes；　it　is　true；　the　duke　decided　on　going　to　war　against
the　wish　of　his　people；　but　in　such　a　case　he　had　to　rely
exclusively　on　his　own　military　followers；　his　so…called
〃drougina；〃　an　institution　very　like　the　old　German　〃comitatus〃
（Geleit）。　As　long　as　the　system　of　land　donations　remained
unknown；　and　the　duke　had　no　other　property　to　distribute　among
his　followers　but　that　taken　in　time　of　war；　the　drougina　or
comitatus　was　far　from　being　numerous。　Hence　the　duke　was　forced
to　ask　the　veche　for　assistance　whenever　he　thought　himself
obliged　to　go　to　war。　The　veche　either　agreed　to　his　demand　and
ordered　the　levy　of　military　forces；　or　refused　all　help；　in　the
latter　case　the　duke　had　no　other　alternative　but　to　abandon　his
project　entirely；　or　to　resign　his　throne。　The　control　in　matters
of　peace　and　war　was　maintained　by　the　people　so　long　as　the　duke
had　no　other　troops　than　the　militia。　But　a　kind　of　regular　army
had　been　created　by　the　end　of　the　thirteenth　century；　owing　to
the　custom　of　rewarding　military　service　by　grants　of　land。　The
so…called　〃pomestnaia〃　system；　which　was　similar　to　the
Carlovingian　system　of　〃benefices；〃　produced　in　Russia　effects
similar　to　those　produced　in　France。　The　popular　militia　was
superseded　by　a　sort　of　feudal　army；　paid　not　in　money　but　in
land。　In　case　of　war　the　duke　was　not　so　much　interested　in
having　the　acquiescence　of　the　people　as　that　of　the　〃men　of
service；〃　slougilii　liudi；　who　constituted　his　military　force；
and　corresponded　somewhat　to　the　knights　in　Feudal　England。　This
change；　as　we　shall　hereafter　see；　had　a　great　influence　on　the
future　destiny　of　the　Russian　folkmote。
　　　　Another　function　of　the　folkmote；　which　appears　to　be
peculiar　to　the　Northern　principalities；　and　especially　to　those
of　Novgorod　and　Pscov；　is　that　of　legislation。　That　the
legislative　functions　of　the　veche　were　unknown　in　the　Southern
principalities　of　Russia　may　be　seen　from　the　fact；　that　no
mention　is　made　of　them　in　the　most　ancient　code　of　the　country。
The　Pravda　of　Jaroslav　in　its　different　versions　shows　no　trace
of　the　interference　of　the　people　in　matters　of　legislation；　it
is　the　exclusive　work　of　the　duke　and　his　councillors。　The　few
amendments　introduced　into　this　legal　code　during　the　first　part
of　the　twelfth　century　have　also　no　other　source　but　the　express
desire　of　the　dukes　and　the　decisions　of　their　Doumas　or
Councils。
　　　　The　exercise　of　legislative　power　by　the　veches　of　Novgorod
and　of　Pscov；　at　least　during　the　fourteenth　and　fifteenth
centuries；　is　illustrated　by　two　judicial　charters；　those　of　1397
and　of　1471；　which；　as　is　evident　from　their　contents；　were　drawn
up　by　the　popular　assembly。　The　charter　of　Pscov　plainly　states
in　one　of　its　later　versions　（that　of　1467　whenever　the　posadnik；
the　supreme　judge　by　the　people；　has　to　decide　a　case　to　which　no
existing　law　applies；　he　must　consult　the　assembly　of　the　people。
The　same　veche　had　the　right　to　annul　every　article　of　the
judicial　charter　which　no　longer　met　with　its　approval。　Mention
of　this　right　is　made　in　the　charter　itself。
　　　　As　to　judicial　powers；　they　remained　unknown　to。　the　Western
and　Southern　the　veche；　at　least　in　principalities　of　Russia；
which　knew　no　other　judges　than　the　duke　and　the　officers　whom　he
appointed。　I　do　not　allude　to　those　arbitrators　to　whom　private
persons　frequently　had　recourse　to　settle　their　differences。
　　　　But　in　Novgorod；　the　fact　of　the　election　of　the　chief　judge；
the　posadnik；　by　a　popular　vote；　shows　that　the　people　were　not
indifferent　to　the　exercise　of　judicial　power。　Appointed　as　he
was　by　the　folkmote；　the　posadnik　could　be　judged　by　no　other
tribunal　than　the　folkmote　itself。　Cases　of　high　treason　were
also　referred　to　the　popular　assembly　just　as　they　were　in　Poland
and　Bohemia。
　　　　What　has　been　stated　establishes　beyond　a　doubt　the　great
extent　of　the　rights　and　privileges　belonging　to　the　folkmote　in
the　Northern　principalities　of　Russia。　The　same　cannot　be　said　of
some　Western　principalities；　such　as　those　of　Volhynia　and
Galicia。　The　example　of　Poland；　where　the　aristocracy　was　very
powerful；　induced　the　boyars　of　those　two　countries　to　make　more
than　one　attempt　to　concentrate　in　their　own　hands　the　chief
rights　of　sovereignty。　The　large　estates　which　they　possessed　and
the　considerable　revenues；　which　the　rich　black　soil　of　the
country　yearly　secured　to　them；　greatly　favoured　their
oligarchical　aspirations。　In　1210；　they　seem　to　have　attained
their　ends。　The　dynasty　of　Rurik　had　ceased　to　rule　over　the
country；　and　a　boyar；　a　member　of　the　local　aristocracy；　had　been
raised　to　the　throne。　But　his　rule　did　not　last　long。　His
contemporaries；　the　other　rulers；　looked　upon　his　elevation　as
illegal；　and　the　King　of　Poland　was　the　first　to　declare　that　a
boyar　had　no　right　to　occupy　a　throne。　To　oppose　the　oligarchy　of
the　boyars　Duke　Daniel；　in　1230；　convened　the　popular　assembly；
the　veche　and　with　the　help　afforded　him　by　people；　fought　the
army　of　the　boyars　and　reduced　them　to　obedience。　This　is；
however；　the　only　case　in　which　the　veche　seems　to　have　played
any　part　in　the　political　history　of　the　country。　The　power　of
the　nobles　prevented　any　further　development　in　that　direction；
and　when　the　principality　passed　into　the　hands　of　the　King　of
Poland；　it　was　already　under　the　yoke　of　the　aristocracy。
　　　　Nevertheless；　even　under　Polish　rule；　the　memory　of　the　old
folkmotes　was　preserved　by　the　country。　Documents　of　the
fifteenth　and　sixteenth　centuries　sometimes　mention　the　existence
of　the　veche　as　of　a　local　assembly　with　very　considerable
executive　and　judicial　rights。
　　　　Of　all　the　principalities　of　Russia　those　of　the　North…East
seem　from　the　most　remote　times　to　have　been　unfavourable　to　the
growth　of　popular　assemblies。　In　those　of　Sousdal　and　of　Riasan；
the　dukes　early　freed　themselves　from　the　necessity　of　election
by　the　people　by　establishing　primogeniture　as　the　law　of
succession　to　the　crown。　The　way　in　which　the　eldest　son　was
admitted　to　succeed　to　the　throne　was　by　associating　him；　during
his　father's　lifetime；　in　the　exercise　of　sovereign　powers。
Vsevolod　III　was　the　first　prince　who　benefited　by　such　a　course。
He　secured　the　throne　to　his　descendants　and　thus　annulled　one　of
the　most　important　rights　of　the　folkmote；　that　of　choosin