292 PROJECTS FOR REFORMING THE PROVINCIAL ADMINISTRATION
ment of four judiciary bodies on the provincial level: a Civil Chamber
(grazhdanskaia palata) composed of 1 president, 2 councillors, 4
"jurymen" (2 nobles and 2 burgesses); a Criminal Chamber (ugolovnaia
palata) staffed in the same way as the Civil one; a Court in Equity
(sovestnyi sud) based on the provisions of the Law of 1775 and the
Charter to the Nobility of 1785; and a Commercial Court (torgovyi sud).
The latter was an innovation which Speransky had advocated before
1812 as a means of fostering and protecting economic activity. The
proposal on the judiciary aimed at implementing Speransky's basic
idea of a limited advisory participation of "public opinion" in local
judicial matters as a means for developing civic consciousness. At the
same time, the proposal introduced an embryonic jury system in the
guise of four "public members" selected among the nobility and towns-
people in each Civil and Criminal court. To safeguard the independence
of the judiciary and to iprevent long delays, Speransky suggested the
formation of a General Provincial Judiciary Assembly (obshchee
sudebnoe gubernskoe prisutstvie) to supervise the administration of
the courts. For greater effectiveness and independence, the Commercial
Court was to have its own executive officers (pristavy - sergeants at
arms) to supervise the execution of its sentences and decisions. Like the
Provincial Administration, and for similar reasons, the courts might
employ young graduates of law schools of Russian universities in the
capacity of supernumerary assessors. This last provision, Speransky
hoped, would serve to increase the number of legally trained and
experienced men in the courts of the country.^1
Turning to the lower levels of local administration, Speransky rec-
ommended that the subdivision of the provinces into several districts
(uezd) be preserved. But as it might be impractical to maintain a strict
separation of the three major functions of local government at this
level, police and economy were combined into one institution. The
judiciary was to remain separate and independent. There were to be
two types of district administration, for the country-district and for the
larger towns. The latter had some special features, into which we need
not enter, arising from the fact that, on the basis of the Charter to
the Towns of 1785, the "societies" of burgesses possessed certain rights
of self-administration in fiscal matters and cases in equity. According
to Speransky's project, the regular country-district administration was to
consist of one Chief of the district (pravitel' uezdm) assisted by a
collegiate council composed of the land captain, town police chief, the
. 1 For the organization of the jUdiciary, see ibid., pp. 295-310, pars. 112-198
passim.