PROJECTS FOR REFORMING THE PROVINCIAL ADMINISTRATION 295Speransky did not intend to introduce (or maintain wherever they
may have existed) equalitarian and democratic principles, even on the
village level. Indeed, the right to participate in the village and town-
ship assemblies - as of old - was exclusively reserved to the heads of
households possessing a "homestead". The junior member of the peasant
household, the landless peasants, the so-called baby!', and the artisans,
were specifically excluded from these rights and privileges. One is
tempted to speak of Speransky as the first Russian statesman to have
"wagered on the strong peasant". In fact, he was not so much "wagering
on the strong" as he was implementing his own notions of the role the
elite - economical and spiritual - played in guiding the mass of the
people towards a higher level of moral, social, political, and material
life.
We might perhaps summarize Speransky's position and approach
towards provincial government as follows: first, he wished to replace
the irresponsible and despotic rule of the provincial governor by
subjecting him to collegiate control and by clearly separating the
judiciary from the administration and the police. In the second place,
he aimed at fostering the political and cultural development of the
leading social elements in such a manner as to pave their way to a
more active and responsible participation in the business of local govern-
ment. And let us not forget that this new administrative scheme was
to find support in a strengthened economic individualism and initiative.
His proposals would also contribute to the government's being better
informed about the conditions and needs of the people in the provinces.
Yet, at no time, did Speransky intend to surrender the principle of the
state's role of leadership and to place real political initiative and self-
government in the hands of the local population.
Speransky's projects on local administration we have considered up
to now, had only been concerned with the free men of the Russian
Empire - the nobility, the burgesses, and the state peasants. The latter,
of course, were not free in the narrow sense of the term, but they
were under the direct jurisdiction of the state and not that of other
individuals. Speransky insisted on this distinction: "Serfdom is distin-
guished from the power held by the sovereign, 1. in that it implies only
the power over labor (praestationis) [sid], 2. and though the latter
[sovereign power] also demands labor, it is not for a private benefit,
but for the public welfare, also its power over labor is exercised only
for a specified time and is equal for all on the basis of a public law;
that is why such labor is called service." 1
1 Speranskii, "Krepostnaia vlast'," Pamiati, p. 852.