PLANS OF REFORM 143whim of another individual. 1 This definition makes it possible to
preserve serfdom, although it implies that legal and procedural forms
will serve to limit its abusive consequences. As to the right to property,
"everyone can dispose of his property according to his own will, within
the framework of the general law; no one can be deprived of his prop-
erty without trial. No one can be forced to perform services or pay
dues and taxes except as established by law or agreement, to the exclu-sion of the whim of another individual." 2 As far as it pertains to
serfdom, the last sentence implies that services and obligations can
be exacted by one individual from another provided the procedures
and formalities established by law are observed.
Then Speransky asks whether these rights should be given to all
citizens without distinction; and he answers in the negative. The law
regulating personal service cannot be the same for everyone. Equal
admission to all services would bring to naught the benefits of the
upper classes. Therefore, the law must be adapted according to individ-
uals and circumstances. Only the upper class, i.e., the nobility, has the
right to serve the state and the monarch, while the common people
can be constrained to perform services for the nobility. Similarly, the
right to property, although granted to all citizens is not the same for
all. Not every Russian will possess the right to own immobile property,
in particular settled real estate (i.e., lands inhabited and worked bypeasants). To be allowed to own settled real estate, the individual must
have some education, know something about law and government.
Such a requirement, naturally, excludes the peasants from ownership
of real estate and limits this right to the nobility. For, in Speransky's
words, "it would be strange if a serf who has become rich by chance
buys a village populated with peasants like himself and governs in
accordance with the laws, while, unprepared by his education, he is
unable to acquire the knowledge of the law or secure the moral respect
for his power." 3 In other words, the peasant, even when successful
economically, cannot be considered morally prepared to exercise the
same rights as the nobleman. For Speransky, therefore, there is no
such thing as social equality before the law. Each individual is equal
only before the particular law of his own class or estate. And though
no one can be deprived of his civil rights, the rights are not the same
for everyone.
1 ibid., p. 54.
2 ibid., p. 55.
3 ibid., p. 57. It should be noted that some peasants were already beginning to
buy settled lands (under cover of third persons' names) and exploit them for their
own personal benefits.