local administration, Iu. V. Got’e, found that in the eighteenth century local
noblemen regularly served locally.
Rulers between 1725 and 1762 did little to improve civil service. In 1740
Empress Anna’s government was working to provide adequate and more widely
distributed civil service salaries, but war with Sweden (1741–3) cut short this effort
and even forced reductions in civil service salaries to pay for war. Similarly, in 1754
Empress Elizabeth’s minister P. I. Shuvalov proposed paying decent salaries to local
civil servants and creating a strict system of education and promotion for official-
dom but, in the face of Seven Years War expenses, the idea was shelved. Thus, from
the 1730s Russia’sofficials were aware of problems but made little progress.
CATHERINE II BETWEEN CAMERALISM AND EMPIRE
Mercantilist and cameralist, inspired by the rationalizing urge of the Enlighten-
ment, Catherine II resolved to create a unified empire (see Map 5). She envi-
sioned an imperial nobility united by the same privileges, institutions, and law, a
singlefiscal regime of direct taxes to rectify the traditionally lighterfiscal burden of
the borderlands, and a single administrative system around the empire. But, ever
the pragmatist, she did not hesitate to maintain different tax and governance
regimes in communities when it was economically or politically advisable to do so.
Catherine began her reign with immediate attention to the deplorable state of
local government, which she attributed to geography and antiquated organization.
As the population had grown, existing territorial divisions made less sense: some
gubernii were huge, but underpopulated; some provinces were more populous than
gubernii. Rationalizing size suited her Enlightenment proclivities. Furthermore,
local government was both unresponsive to the center and unable to serve local
needs. Already in 1762 Catherine II created commissions for immediate changes
and more fundamental reform; after more than a decade’s work, they proposed
intensification through decentralization.
Immediate changes (1763–4) introduced vice-governors at the gubernia level
and assistants to governors at lower levels. Governors’duties were defined, pensions
were improved for noblemen (men could retire with half pay after twenty-five years
in service and after reaching age 50) and better salaries were set for most positions,
almost doubling those that did exist. The British traveler William Coxe, writing
about Catherine’s judiciary in the 1790s, observed:“she has increased the salaries of
the judges, who before, from the narrowness of their income, were necessarily
exposed to almost irresistible temptations from bribery.”At the same time aggres-
sive corruption investigations of bureaucrats were launched and the procuracy
expanded, placing an agent independent of the governor at all levels. Central
oversight was strengthened by creating several Senate Departments that bypassed
and undermined the Colleges. Currying noble favor, and in the long run wanting to
cultivate a more energized noble estate, Catherine also reversed policy to permit
noblemen to develop local roots: in 1764 and 1766 governors at all levels were
306 The Russian Empire 1450– 1801