ADMINISTRATIVE AcrIVITIES 1802-1812 73the rights enjoyed by its citizens were at stake. For Russian "publicopinion" it was of concern too, as it was argued that the rights and
institutions recognized by the Emperor in Finland should be extendedto the Empire as a whole. It is neither within our task nor our ability
to settle the thorny legal problem here. We can only mention the
administrative form Speransky gave the relationship between Finland
and Russia.^1 Speransky considered that "Finland is a state not a
province" and its affairs had all the complexity of the business of an
independent state. They could not be handled as a routine admin-
istrative matter by subordinate officials overburdened with other
concerns. 2 Therefore the administration of the Grand Duchy in St.
Petersburg became the responsibility of a special Commission for Fin-
nish Affairs composed of Russian and Finnish dignitaries. The Com-
mission was to receive and process the reports from the local authorities
in Finland, and, having analyzed and summarized them, submit them
to the Emperor. All legislation pertaining to Finland was to be drafted
and - after approval by the Emperor - receive its final form in this
Commission. In short, the Commission served as intermediary and
transmission belt between the Emperor and his subjects in the Grand
Duchy. Through its Finnish members, the Commission could bring
directly to the Sovereign's attention the desiderata and needs of Fin-
land, while the Grand Duke could be assured that his will and policy
would be formulated in the manner best suited for the special condi-
tions of Finland and thereby be implemented promptly and effectively.
As far as Speransky was concerned, the principal merit of the system
lay in the fact that it kept the monarch informed of the needs of the
country through persons in direct touch with local conditions and yet
not unaware of the point of view of the central administration. In a
sense, it was a new version of the system that had prevailed in Finland
under Swedish rule, before the latter part of the 18th century. While
it clearly worked to the advantage of the Finnish nobility that had
made common cause with Russia against Sweden, it also made for
better contact between the governor and at least some of the governed.^3
1 See Horodkin. Sdl) bergson. Onlin. and the shorter sUlllmary in Scheibert, cited in
bibliography. _
2 "Finland is a state and not a province, one cannot govern it on the side and
amidst a multitude of current business." Speranskii, "Otchet v delakh 1810 ... ,"
Sbornik IRIO, 21 (1877), p. 456.
3 The Commission which prepared the new organization of Finland consisted of:
Geiking, Teil'e, Emin, Friktsius, Rehbinder, Jegerhorn and its minutes were sub·
mitted to the Emperor through Speransky who was the chief rapporteur and
redacteur. The instructions to the Commission, dated October 18, 1809, can be
found in Sbornik istoricheskikh materialov iZlllechennykh iz arkhiva S. E. I. V.
Kantseliarii, III, No. 362, pp. 267-269. The decree of instruction begins with the
following words: "Desiring that the affairs concerning the administration of the