Michael Speransky. Statesman of Imperial Russia, 1772–1839 - Marc Raeff

74 ADMINISTRATIVE ACIIVITIES 1802-1812

We note that the administrative arrangement worked out by
Speransky respected the peculiarities and traditions of the newly
annexed country. Clearly, he and the government had no intention of
changing the way of life, customs, speech, religion, and culture of the
Finns. The political organization and internal autonomy of the Grand
Duchy guaranteed to the Finns all the privileges and rights they had
enjoyed theretofore and to which even the Russian nobility could not
aspire. On the other hand, there is no denying that another principle
underlay the new regime of Finland and tended in the opposite direction.
In spite of the desire of the Finnish nobility and clergy, Alexander I and
Speransky refused to introduce any truly constitutional and represent-
ative features which would go beyond the legal safeguards of life and
property. Lip service was paid to the idea of a consultative represent-
ative assembly, but the Diet's competence and functions were so limited
and its "representative" character so narrowly circumscribed that we
cannot forbear feeling that at the bottom of their hearts neither
Alexander nor Speransky cared to promote a real constitutional regime. 1
The "constitutional camouflage" was only designed to placate and
attract the new subjects of the Empire. As a matter of fact, the
organization and the limitations placed on the initiative and power of
the Commission for Finnish Affairs in St. Petersburg strongly suggest
that Speransky's ultimate aim was to bring about a structural identity

between the Russian and Finnish administrations. It would have

clearly been the case had his proposals for the reorganization of the

Russian government been implemented in full. Such a result, then,

would justify the view that the administrative system devised for Fin-

land was only a first step in the "organic russification" of the Grand

Duchy by giving it an administration identical to Russia's and by

drawing the Finnish nobility into imperial government service. It

would have been a familiar story, strongly reminiscent of the ways of

the Grand Dukes of Moscow for bringing about the cultural, social,

and political assimilation of newly acquired possessions. It would also

have been very much in the tradition of Maria Theresa's policy of

administrative and social centralization and Gleichschaltung.

If the foregoing interpretation be correct, we detect in the case of

newly acquired Finland which are submitted for My [i.e. Alexander I) decision be

first examined and considered on those very principles and laws which are peculiar

to that country and have been confirmed by Us ... "

1 As Speransky wrote to Governor Shteingel, May 19, 1811: "The Council has

been established not on the basis of a constitutional right, but exclusively by a

decision of the government." Sbornik istoricheskikh materialov iwlechennykh iz

arkhiva S.E.l.V. Kantseliarii, III, No. 378, p. 307.