338 IDDIFYING RUSSIAN LAW
novelties and creating new norms. This is evidenced by the manner in
which he introduced them - furtively, illegally, as it were. As the
Digest was only a summary and extract of existing laws, its paragraphs
should have been based on actual legislative acts to which the official
or judge could refer to check the accuracy and full meaning of the
statement. But how could Speransky have footnoted and underpinned
with references some of his novelties and iimovations? And how do it
for linking statements? Speransky resorted to two methods to get around
this difficulty, methods which show that he was not q:uite disingenuous.
First of all, he gave references only to whole sections of the Digest, and
not to individual paragraphs. These citations were so numerous and
referred to such a welter of laws that they could not possibly be
checked. He also used the system of multiple and vague references, so
that it was quite difficult to find the relevant text and specific context
on which a given statement in the Digest might be based. Upon close
examination of some paragraphs and the citations to them, students
have found that none of the references really support the statements in
the Digest. The second method was more devious yet. Speransky used
some concepts and definitions from his own code of 1809, pretending
that it could now be considered as actual Russian legislation becauseit had been adopted in the Council of State. But as if aware of the
"fraud" he tried to perpetrate he did not give any direct references
to the code itself. 1
The reason for introducing legal novelties in this indirect way was
probably not so much that Speransky wanted to deceive Nicholas J,
as that he knew Nicholas would not permit the writing of a new code
where these innovations might be brought in openly and coherently.
Yet, Speransky felt that Russia was in need of the innovations in order
to have a solid foundation for a modern and progressive social and
economic development. This being the case, he naturally expected that
the Digest would be recognized as the authoritative source of Russian
law on which judicial decisions would be based. He did not care to
have judges and officials go back to the antiquated laws and concepts
of the original acts (which would negate his work of modernization
and innovation en sourdine).
Theoretically, however, the Digest was supposed to be only a conve-
nient reference compendium, at most a summary, of existing laws - an1 On the preceding, see the articles of Vinaver cited earlier, and Kasso, "K istorii
Svoda Zakonov grazhdanskikh," loco cit., who - while disagreeing as to the political
implications pointed out by Vinaver and the sources of Speransky's inspiration -
confirms the picture oti the method used in the composition of the Digest.