Michael Speransky. Statesman of Imperial Russia, 1772–1839 - Marc Raeff

REFORM OF RUSSIA'S FINANCES AND CENTRAL ADMINISTRATION 103

In his last sentence, John Quincy Adams correctly noted the difficulties
that the government faced in its efforts at instilling greater public faith
and confidence in its financial policies. A few weeks later, on August

11, J. Q. Adams wrote again to the Secretary of State concerning the

financial reform:

"Measures of a similar nature to this [i.e. fixing of the price and

relation of copper coin to sheet copper] have been so often resorted

to by all governments of Europe that this step has scarcely excited

a sensation or a murmur. The new loan proposed to receive 2

rubles of assignation paper and to promise payment of the interest

and principal of one for it in silver. But as the loan was altogether

voluntary, it impaired none of the previous obligations of the

government. It saved at least the appearances. The effect of this

manifesto is well understood but as the diminution proposed in

the coin falls short of the actual depreciation of the paper, the

people do not appear at all affected by it. At Riga and the other

Livonian ports, they have hitherto been accustomed to keep their

accounts and transact all their commercial business in computation

of German money. The object of this manifesto is to introduce

an uniform system in this respect throughout the Empire." 1

The last consideration noted by Adams was not formally stated in

Speransky's proposals. But what we know of the government's policy

of bringing greater consistency and uniformity into all aspects of

public life, makes the American Minister's explanation quite plausible.

Another keen observer, and an experienced and imaginative economist

and statesman in his own right, Freiherr vom Stein, commented rather

favorably on Speransky's efforts, although he was not a great admirer

of the Russian statesman. In the course of a conversation vorn Stein

had in Freiburg in 1813 with Nicholas Turgenev (attached to his

Chancelry for Liberated Territories), he remarked - as reported by

Turgenev in his diary: "We talked about Speransky. Stein maintained

that Speransky had done good: 1. he increased the revenue [of the

state] (although he agreed with me that die Abgaben waren schlecht

gewahlt), and 2. that he stopped the issuance of assignats." 2

Russian opinion was far less enthusiastic than these two foreign

observers. The nation as a whole suffered a few new hardships, as

Speransky had predicted it would temporarily, resulting from the in-

creases in dues on passports, postal services, stamp paper, etc. We are,

of course, in no position to gauge accurately the reaction of the general

1 Department of State - Russia, I, John Quincy Adams to Secretary of State,

Dispatch No. 20 (14 August 1810)'.

2 N. I. Turgenev, "Dnevniki i pis'ma za 1811-1816 gg," Arkhiv brat'ev

Turgenevykh, II, (St. Pbg. 1913), p. 232 (entry dated 21 Dec. 1813, Freiburg).