APPENDIX 379In analysing Russian conditions, Speransky observes that there is no
genuine public opinion capable of assisting the autocrat and to hold the
officials in leash. But once it is solidly established, the nobility will be
in a position to evolve into a class possessing the qualities necessary to
a spokesman of public opinion. In the meantime, Russian history has
created an institution perfectly suited to express thi~ public opinion in
the making: the Senate. Endowed with rights and new privileges (as
for example those suggested by Derzhavin, Vorontsov, Zavadovskii), it
will assist the autocratic sovereign in his task, for it will be the channel
of information on the true conditions and needs of the country and the
organ of supervision of the proper functioning of the executive and
judicial institutions.
So far we have seen that Speransky's arguments and goals, as expressed
in his writings of 1802 and 1803, were the same as those of the Senatorial
party. But when we analyse his thought more carefully we note new ele-
ments which not only are absent from the Senatorial "program", but
whose dynamics is diametrically opposed to the aspirations and hopes of
men like Vorontsov and Panin. These new elements may be discerned not
only in connection with the role assigned to the reformed institutions,
but also with respect to the method suggested by Speransky for obtaining
these structural transformations.
To begin with, Speransky stresses the role of institutional mechanisms
in reforming the administrative and judiciary machinery. "But why, he
asks, are the defects in the laws not as noticeable in other states as they
are with us?" And he answers, "Because in these countries the laws,
although imperfect, are assured of precise execution, because those
countries have enlightened executors; because judges there are trained,
not created; because the other branches of the administration facilitate
instead of preventing the application of the law; finally, because a good
monarchic constitution corrects a great number of particular defects." 12
Institutions, however, have a double function in the creation of a
public opinion which may serve as foundation for a constitution. First
of all, they provide the framework which permits an orderly and unhin-
dered organic evolution. 13 Moreover, institutions should have a didactic
and positive formative function as well. This is where there appears the
profound difference in method and spirit between Speransky's thinking
and the point of view of the Senatorial party. Speransky goes so far as
to say, in flagrant contradiction to his other declaratiOn! of principle,
that the direct action of the government may create, at any rate rapidly
12 "Zapiska ob ustroistve sudebnykh i pravitel' stvennykh uchrezhdenii v Rossli -
1803", Proekty i zapiski, p. 125
13 "Otryvok 0 komissii ulozheniia - 1802", Proekty i zapiski p. 21