72 ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIVITIES 1802-1812only to the extent of Speransky's role in it. Helped by some Finnish
dignitaries such as Rehbinder, Bishop Tengstrom and Count Armfelt,
Speransky drew up the blueprint for Finland's administrative system.
The Grand Duchy was to be governed in the name of the Emperor
by a Governor, who, Speransky hoped, would be a real viceroy in full
control of the executive; a hope which was foiled by the weakness of
the first governor, Shteingel, and the energy and ability of the Finnish
officials. A Governing Council, not unlike the Russian Senate. meeting
under the chairmanship of the Governor, was to assist the executive
and act as a high judiciary and a limited legislative body. The three
estates of Finland were to send representatives to a Diet (Seim) which
met at regular periods. The provision for a Diet has led many historians
to believe that Speransky established a true constitutional regime in
Finland, expecting it to serve as a model for a future Russian
constitution. That he indeed had hopes of extending some of the
features of the Finnish system to Russia is quite probable, as some of
his later reform proposals tend to indicate. But it certainly would be
misleading to call the regime established in Finland "constitutional".
in the sense of the primacy of a representative legislature. The statute
of the Diet made it quite clear that it had no legislative power
whatever. The Seim's only function was to provide opinions and
information on specific questions put to it by the Governor - and only
matters brought up by the Governor could be put on the agenda of
the Diet.^1
The exact nature of the relationship which in 1809 bound Finland
to the Russian Empire was not clearly defined (at least until 1909)
and the question has given rise to much argument among historians and
jurists of both nations. 2 The problem - as eventually defined - came
down to this: had Finland voluntarily, through its Diet at Borgll.s,
recognized the Emperor of Russia as its ruler while preserving its
special institutions and organization, without becoming part and parcel
of the Russian Empire; or had the Grand Duchy been annexed to the
Empire (by international treaty) and then been granted a special status
and local autonomy by the sovereign will of the Grand-Duke-Emperor?
The issue was vital indeed, for the autonomy of the Grand Duchy, and
1 Borodkin, lstoriia Finliandii, I, p. 253. A French translation of excerpts of this
statute is to be found in La Constitution de la Finlande, pp. 115-117.
2 The works by Borodkin, Danielson, Erich, Ordin, Osten-Sacken, Schybergson
cited in the bibliography of this chapter discuss the problem at some length. But
see also the very suggestive analyses in: Korkunov, Russkoe Gosudarstvennoe pravo,
II, 290 ff; N. I. Lazarevskii, Russkoe gosudarstvennoe pravo, I, p. 235; B. E. Nol'de,
"Edinstvo i nerazdel'nost' Rossii," Ocherki russkogo gosudarstvennogo prava (St. Pbg.
1911), 475-554.