314 SPERANSKY AND THE DECEMBRISTS
at the same time test his loyalty) by calling him to participate in the
trial of the conspirators.
The role played by Speransky in the trial proceedings has been
described, on the basis of archival materials, by Prince Golitsyn in an
article published in 1916. As Golitsyn's findings quite adequately cover
Speransky's participation in the trial - and as no other important
sources on this episode are available - we shall merely summarize
them. 1 The imperial decree setting up the High Criminal Court to
try the Decembrists was issued on June 1, 1826. But a couple of months
before that, in April,· Speransky had begun working on the preparation
of the trial and of the instructions by which the Court was to be
guided. He became the closest collaborator and assistant to the Emperor
on all matters pertaining to this important business.
The Court was composed of 72 members drawn from the three major
government bodies (soslovie), i.e., 18 from the Council of State, 3 from
the Holy Synod, 36 from the Senate, and 15 special appointees. The
President of the Council of State, Prince Lopukhin, was appointed
President of the Court. Speransky copied many rules of procedure for
the Court from past extraordinary political trials, especially those of
Mirovich and Pugachev in the reign of Catherine II. But he added
some special rules for the needs of the present court. Thus, he was
responsible for the Court's asking only three questions of each accused:
whether he acknowledged his signature beneath the testimony, whether
he had given the testimony of his free will, and whether he had been
confronted with other witnesses. Such a procedure eliminated, for all
intents and purposes, a personal examination of the accused in Court
and based the Court's ultimate verdict exclusively on the written
records of the pre-trial investigation and interrogations. Speransky also
suggested (and the suggestion was adopted) that a special committee
of members of the Court make a search for all legal precedents pertinent
to the case and then classify the defendants into various categories for
easier and more equitable assignment of punishments. Following the
intention of Emperor Nicholas, Speransky envisaged death sentences
(even before the trial had been heIdi). This is shown by his opposition
to the appointment to the Court of too many members from the
clergy, for clerics could not vote capital punishment.
The documents and papers found and examined by Golitsyn show
clearly that "Speransky, while remaining officially in the shadow, and
a rank and file member of the High Court, was at the same time the
1 Golitsyn, "Speranskii v verkhovnom sude nad dekabristami," Russkii lstoricheskii
Zhumal, NOB. 1-2 (1917), pp. 61-102 passim.