Thesystemoflandendowmentsinfavourofthehigherclergyandmonasteries，andalsoofpersonsbelongingtotheknightlyclass，hadincreasedtosuchanextentthat，accordingtomoderncalculation，two-thirdsofthecultivatedareawasalreadythepropertyeitherofecclesiasticsorofseculargrandees。Itisthereforeeasytounderstandwhy，duringthesixteenthcentury，themigratorystateoftheRussianagriculturalpopulationcametobeconsideredasarealdangertotheStatebythehigherclassesofRussiansociety。Themostpowerfulofthenoblesandgentrydidtheirbesttoretainthepeasantsontheirlands。Somewentevenfarther，and，byalleviatingtheburdensofvillein-service，andsecuringamoreefficientprotectionforthemfromadministrativeoppression，inducedthepeasantswhoinhabitedthelandsofsmallersquirestoleavetheiroldhomesandsettleontheirmanors。ItwasinordertoprotectthesmalllandownersfromthissortofoppressionthatBorisGoudonov，theall-powerfulrulerofRussiainthereignofTheodorIvanovitch，promulgatedalaw，accordingtowhicheveryonewasauthorisedtoinsistonthereturnofapeasantwholefthisabode，andthatduringthefiveyearsnextfollowinghisdeparture。Thislawwaspromulgatedin1597。AsnomentionismadeinitoftherightpreviouslyenjoyedbythepeasantsofremovingfromonemanortoanotheronSt。George’sDay，thislawof1597hasbeenconsideredbyhistoriansasthedirectcauseoftheintroductionoftheso-called\"bondagetothesoil\"（krepostnoiepravo）。Suchwascertainlynotitsobject。TherightofmigrationontheDayofSt。Georgewasopenlyacknowledgedbythelawsof1601and1602。
Thebondageofthepeasanttothesoilbecameanestablishedfactonlyintheyear1648，whenthenewcodeoflaw，theso-calledOulogienie（chap。xi），refusedtoanyonetherighttoreceiveonhislandsthepeasantwhoshouldrunawayfromamanor，andabolishedthatlimitoftimebeyondwhichthelandlordlosttherighttoreclaimthepeasantwhohadremovedfromhisancientdwelling。
Thenumberofserfsrapidlyincreasedduringthesecondhalfoftheseventeenthandtheeighteenthcenturies，owingtotheprodigalitywithwhichtheCzarsandEmperorsendowedthemembersoftheofficialclasswithlands，indisregardoftenoftheirpreviousoccupationbyfreevillagecommunities，themembersofwhichwereforcedtobecometheserfsofthepersonswhoreceivedthegrant。ItisinthiswaythatCatherineII，forinstance，duringthethirty-fouryearsofherreign，increasedthenumberofserfsby800，000newones，andthatPaulI，inaperiodoffouryears，added600，000tothenumber，whichwasalreadyenormous。
BeforethereignofCatherine，serfdomwasalmostunknowninLittleRussia，whereithadbeenabolishedbyBogdanChmelnitzky，soonaftertheseparationofLittleRussiafromPoland，andintheUkraine（themodernGovernmentofKharkov），whereithadneverbeforeexisted。In1788sherevokedtherighthithertoenjoyedbythepeasantsofthesetwoprovincestoremovefromonemanortoanother。Thesamerightoffreeremovalwasabolishedafewyearslaterinthe\"LandoftheDonKossacks\"andamongthepeasantsoftheSouthernGovernments，calledNewRussia（Novorossia）。
ButifthesecondpartoftheeighteenthcenturysawtheterritorialextensionofserfdomoveralmostalltheEmpire，itwasalsotheperiodinwhichfirstbeganthemovementwhichledtoemancipation。FromFrancecamethefirstappealsfortheliberationoftheserfs。In1766theSocietyofPoliticalEconomistsfoundedinPetersburgonthemodeloftheagriculturalsocietiesofFrancewasaskedbytheimpresstoanswerthequestion：\"WhethertheStatewouldbebenefitedbytheserfbecomingthefreeownerofhisland？\"MarmontelandVoltaireconsideredittobetheirdutytoexpressopinionsinfavourofapartialabolitionofserfdom。Marmontelthoughtthatthetimewascometosupersedevillein-servicebyasortofhereditarycopyhold。Voltairewentastepfarther，invitingtheimpresstoliberateimmediatelytheserfsontheChurchlands。Astotherest，freecontractaloneoughttosettlethequestionoftheiremancipation。AnotherFrenchmanmuchlessknown，thelegistBeardedel’Abaye，gaveitashisopinionthattheGovernmentshouldmaintainastrictneutralitytowardsthequestionofserfdom。Itoughttobeabolishedonlybyfreecontractbetweenlandlordsandserfs，theformerendowingthelatterwithsmallparcelsofland。Inthiswaytheserfwouldbecomeaprivateowner，sothatincaseheshouldrentanylandfromthesquire，thesquirewouldbeabletoseizethepeasant’splotincaseofnon-paymentofhisrent。DiderotwastheonlyFrenchmanwhoacknowledgedthenecessityofanimmediateabolitionofpersonalservitude；butinhisletterstotheEmpresshedoesnotsayasinglewordaboutthenecessityforsecuringtotheliberatedserfatleastasmallportionofthemanorialland。
AlthoughCatherineIIwaswillingtobeadvisedbytheEncyclopedistsastothewayinwhichserfdommightbeabolished，shetookeffectualmeanstopreventtheexpressionofRussianpublicopiniononthesamesubject。AmemorialpresentedtothePetersburgSocietyofPoliticalEconomistsbyayoungRussianauthorcalledPelenevwasnotallowedtoappearinprint，fornootherreasonthanthatitcontainedacriticismontheexistingsystemofserfdom。（1*）Theauthorofthememorialdidnotdemandtheimmediateabolitionofthisoldwrong；heonlywantedtoseeitreplacedbyasortofperpetualcopyhold。TheGovernmentwasmoreseveretowardsanotherRussianwriter，Radischev，whowasthefirsttoadvocatenotonlythepersonallibertyoftheserf，butalsohisendowmentwithland。TheworkofRadischev（2*）
appearedin1789，severalyearsafterthesuppressionoftheinsurrectionarymovementofPougachev，butitwasregardedasasortofcommentaryonthedemandfor\"libertyandland，\"whichtheRussianpeasanthadaddressedtothatleader，whohadanswereditbyasolemnpromisethathewouldmaketheserffreeandprosperous。CatherinenotonlyorderedtheimmediatesuppressionoftheworkofRadischev，butbroughttheauthorbeforetheCourtsofJustice，accusinghimofbeingatraitortohiscountry。Radischevwascondemnedtodeath；butthispenaltywascommutedtoperpetualbanishmenttoSiberia。
ItwasnottillthereignofAlexandertheFirstthattheRussianGovernmentbegantotakeeffectualmeasurestoamelioratethesocialconditionoftheserf。Accordingtotheaccountgivenbythoseimmediatelyaroundhim，andespeciallybyAdamCzartorysky，Alexanderwasanavowedfriendofpeasantemancipation。Hegavehisfirmsupporttotheproposedlawgivingthelandlordstherighttoliberatetheirserfs，andeventoendowthemwithsharesintheopenfieldsiftheypaidforthem。
In1803thislawwaspassed，and47，000serfsweresoonafterenfranchised，andbecameaseparateclassunderthenameofthe\"freeagriculturists。\"Sixteenyearslater（in1819）theenfranchisementoftheserfbecameanaccomplishedfactinthethreeBalticprovinces，thepeasantobtainingthefreedisposalofhispersononconditionofabandoningtohislandlordtheparcelsofgroundpreviouslyinhispossession。Thisreformwasaccomplishedinthesamemannerasthatcarriedoutin1812byNapoleonintheKingdomofPoland。InthethoroughlyRussianprovincesnodirectmeasureswereatthistimetakentoabolishthelegalservitudeofthepeasant，butthequestionwasmorethanoncedebatedinprivatecirclesandbylearnedbodies。Intheyear1812，forinstance，thePetersburgSocietyofPoliticalEconomistsdeclaredthatitwouldgive2000roublestotheauthorofthebesttreatiseonthequestionoftherelativeadvantagesoffreeandservilelabourinagriculture。ThisquestionbyitselfshowstheinfluencewhichAdamSmith’s\"WealthofNations，\"whichhadbeentranslatedintoRussianin1803，wasbeginningtoexerciseonRussianthought。NinetreatiseswereforwardedtotheSociety，ofwhichthreeonlywereinfavourofthefurthermaintenanceofservilelabour。Butthegreaternumberexpressedtheopinionthattheenfranchisementoftheserf，providedthathewasallowedtokeepthelandheoccupied，wouldbeofgreatadvantagetothelandlordhimself。Thisidea，inconformitytowhichserfdomhadbeenabolishedintheBalticprovinces，wastheexpressionofafactquitefamiliartothestudentofeconomichistory。Theworkofanenslavedlabourerisneversoproductiveasthatofafreelabourer。Solongasrentislow，ascertainlywasthecaseinRussiainpastcenturies，theworkoftheserfisbynomeansfairlyrecompensedbythelandheowns。Butinthefirstquarterofthenineteenthcentury，whenRussiabegantobeconsideredasthegranaryofEurope，onaccountofthevastexportsofwheatfromherports，rentrapidlyrose，andthisriseproducedacompletechangeintherelativevalueofservileworkandthelandwhichwasinthepossessionofthepeasant。
ThequestionputbytheSocietyofPoliticalEconomistscouldnot，therefore，possiblyhavereceivedanyotheranswerthanthatgiventoitbythemajorityoftheauthorswhosentinpaperstotheSociety。Serfdomwasrapidlybecomingaburdenonthemanoriallordsthemselves，asmanyofthembegantobeconscious。
ThebaronsoftheBalticshorewerethefirsttounderstandtheadvantagewhichtheliberationoftheserf，followedbyaresumptionofthegroundheowned，wouldhaveontheirclassinterests。ThenobilityofToulaandRiasan，aswellasthatofDinabourg，Petersburg，andCzarskoieSelo，seemedalsotobecomeconsciousofthisfact，fortheypetitionedtheEmperorNicholastoestablishlocalcommitteeswhomightpreparetheoutlinesofanewemancipationact。AmongthenoblesimmediatelysurroundingtheCzar，PrinceMentchikovexpressedhisopinionofthedesirabilityandadvantageoffreeingthepeasantandatthesametimeofenrichingthelandlordbyleavinginhishandsallthosesharesinthecommongroundwhichhadbeenheldbythepeasants。
TheinterestsofthenobilitycertainlyrequiredtheestablishmentofaclasssimilartothatoftheEnglishlabourers，butthepeasantswerenaturallyaversetoanychangewhichwouldlessentheirholdonthesoil。In1812apeasantrisingtookplaceintheGovernmentofPensa，therevoltedserfsexpressingtheirwantsbytheoldmotto\"libertyandLand。\"In1826againthesamemottowasthewatchwordofanotherrising，thistimeprovokedbyarumourthatlandandlibertywouldshortlybesecuredtotheserfs。
Undertheinfluenceofthisclearexpressionofthepeople’swants，theGovernmentofNicholasabandonedallideaofemancipationwhichwasnottobefollowedbytheendowmentofthepeasantwithland。Notdaring，asheopenlyacknowledgedtolayhandsonthesacredrightsofprivatepropertybyliberatingtheserfsandmakingthemfreeownersofthesoil，Nicholasproposedtoaltertheexistingconditionoftheserfbymakinghimasortofcopyholderorperpetualtenantofsmallparcelsofmanorialground，onconditionofthepaymentofperpetualrent。InthePolishprovinces，suchcopyholdtenures，veryliketheFrenchcensives，werealreadyinexistence。TheGovernment，therefore，onlyextendedasystemwhichalreadyexistedwhen，in1842，theyorderedthepreparationineachmanorofasortofregistry，called\"inventory，\"inwhichtheamountofpaymentsinkindandmoney，madebytheserfstothelandlord，weretobeinscribed，inorderthatinfuturenootherleviesmightbemade。
Neitherofthesetwoschemesforamendingtheuntenablepositionoftheserfwasgoodenoughtoobtaintheapprobationofthosetowhom，atthistime，actuallybelongedtheguidanceofpubicopinion。ItwillbetotheeternalhonouroftheRussianpressthatitconstantlypreachedinfavourofareformwhichwouldatonceliberatetheserfandmakehimlegalownerofthesharesofmanorialgroundwhichwerealreadyinhispossession。
Amongthepersonsdirectlyimplicatedintheinsurrectionarymovementofthe24thofDecember1825，two，PestelandJakoushkine，hadalreadydeclaredthemselvestobesupportersofsuchascheme。
Thediffusionofsocialistideasgreatlycontributedtostrengthenamongtheliteraryclassthepersuasionthatitwouldbeimpossibletoliberatetheserfotherwisethanbyendowinghimwithland。Thewell-knownplotwhichwasorganisedbyPetroschevsky，amongitsotheraims，hadthatofallottingparcelsofgroundtotheliberatedserf。ThegreatexileHerzen，inaRussiannewspaperthenpublishedinLondon，openlyexpressedhisopinionthatthecommonownershipofthelandshouldberetainedinthehandsoftheenfranchisedpeasant；andamongthemanyschemesofemancipation，whichcirculatedintheformofmanuscriptduringthelatterpartofNicholas’sreign，morethanoneadvocatedthenecessityofretainingtheancienttieswhichboundthepeasanttothesoilbymakinghimthelegalownerofhisshareintheopenfields。
The\"providentialmission\"oftheCzarAlexandertheSecondwasthereforedisclosedinastateofsocietywhichwasalreadypreparedtoacceptthegeneraloutlinesofasocialreform，theendofwhichwouldbenotonlytoliberate，butalsotoenrich，thepeasant。AssoonasAlexanderascendedthethronerumoursbegantobecirculatedastotheapproachingabolitionofserfdom。Theunexpecteddeathofhisfatherplacedhimonthethroneatamomentofgreatandgeneraldepression，occasionedbythedefeatoftheRussianmilitaryforcesunderthewallsofSebastopol。TheyoungEmperormadeaneloquentappealtothepatriotismofhissubjects，invitingthemtoincreasethemeansofdefencebyavoluntarylevyofakindofmilitia，knownunderthenameofOpolchenie。Thismeasurestrengthenedthebeliefinthenearnessofsocialandpoliticalreforms。Thepeasants，enrolledintheself-raisedregimentsofthemilitia，begantothinkthattheirmoreorlessvoluntarysacrificeoflifeandfortunewouldherewardedbyacompleteliberationfromtheignominiousbondsofpersonalservitude。Crowdsofserfsaskedtobeadmittedintothemilitia，expectingtoattainfreedominthisway。
WhenthePeaceofPariswassigned，andthepeasantsofthemilitiawereorderedtoreturntotheirdailytasks，theyopenlyexpressedtheirbeliefthatthechartersbywhichtheEmperorhadliberatedthemfrombondagewereconcealedbytheirlandlords。
Theserumoursproducedgreatexcitement。Theyears1854and1855
arenotoriousforaseriesoflocalrebellions。TheseinsurrectionstookplacepartlyontheshoresoftheVolga，whichhadalreadyfelt，inthetimeofCatherinetheSecond，thehorrorsofajacquerie，partlyinsomeCentralandSouth-westernGovernments，suchasVladimir，Riasan，Tambov，Pensa，Voronej，andKiev。Theserevolutionarymovements，directedexclusivelyagainstthefeudalaristocracy，producedagreatimpressionontheCzarAlexander。AddressingthechiefsoftheMoscovitenobility（theso-calledmarshals），theCzarshowedhisappreciationofthewantsofthetimebythefollowingwords：
\"Gentlemen，yousurelyunderstandyourselvestheimpossibilityofretaining，withoutalterationandchange，theexistingmodeofowningsouls[ausualexpression，themeaningofwhichistherighttotheunpaidworkoftheserfs]。Itisbettertoabolishpersonalservitudebylegislativemeasuresthantoseeitabolishedbyamovementfrombelow。Iaskyoutoconsidersuchmeasuresasmightforwardthisend。\"Thesepromisingwords，althoughfollowedbyadirectdeclarationthatserfdomwasnottobeabolishedatonce，strengthenedtheexpectationsofthosewhothoughtthatthenewreignwouldinaugurateaneraofwidesocialandpoliticalreform。AlthoughtheGovernor-GeneralofMoscow，Zakrevsky，didhisbesttopersuadethenobilitythatallprojectsconcerningtheabolitionofserfdomwerelaidaside，itverysoonappearedthatsuchwasbynomeanstheintentionoftheCzar；forduringthecoronationtheHomeSecretary，Lanskoy，bythedirectcommandofAlexander，enteredintocommunicationwiththosenoblemenwhowerepresentinMoscow，inordertoascertainwhatweretheiropinionsastothebestmeansofbringingaboutanameliorationintheactualconditionoftheserfs。ThesenegotiationsleftnodoubtastotheanimositywithwhichthenobilityofGreatRussiaconsideredeveryplantendingtotheemancipationofthepeasant。ThisinducedtheMinistertoturnhiseyestothoseprovincesinwhichtheideaofliberatingtheserfshadtakenrootatthetimewhenpersonalservitudehadbeenabolishedbyNapoleonIintheneighbouringdistrictsofPoland，particularlytheGovernmentsofVilna，Kovno，andGrodno。
TheLithuaniannobleswerealreadyfavourabletotheidea，andwereeasilyinducedbytheGovernorGeneralNasimovtopresenttotheCzaranaddressaskingfortheabolitionofbondage，butatthesametimedemandingexclusivepossessionofthelandforthenobility。YouthereforeseethattheconditionsonwhichtheLithuaniannobleswantedtoseetheenfranchisementcarriedoutwerethesameasthoseonwhichithadbeenalreadycarriedoutinPolandandtheBalticprovinces。Seeingthedifficultyofpreservingfortheirownprofittheunpaidservicesofthepeasant，theywereanxioustosecuretothemselvesthemonopolyofthesoil。Theserfwastobeallowedtobecomeafreepersononlyonconditionofremainingaproletarian，livingexclusivelyonthewagesheearned。Carriedoutonsuchconditions，theemancipationwouldhardlyhavemetwiththeapprovalofthosewhoweremostdirectlyconcerned。AsfarbackasthereignoftheEmpressCatherinethepeasanthadplainlydeclaredthathewantednotonlyliberty，butland。Hewasmindfulofhisancientstate，previoustothatofbondage，which，aswehavealreadyshown，wasthestateofanownerincommonofthegroundhemadefruitfulbyhiswork。Nopoweronearthwouldhavebeenstrongenoughtobreaktheties，centuriesold，whichunitedhimtothesoil。Itwasnodoubtintheinterestsofthenobilitytoseethesetiesbroken，forwhocouldbethegainersinaschemewhichpromisedenhancementofthemercantilevalueofthesoilandcheaplabour，ifnotthosewhohadsecuredtothemselvesthemonopolyofthepropertyinland？What，ontheotherhand，wastheliberatedproletariantobecomeifnotalabourer，givenuptoeternaltoilontheestatesofaland-monopolisingnobility，andboundtoreceivefromtheirhandsthosebarewageswhichwouldcovertheexpenseofhisexistence？TheEmperorandsomepersonsinhisconfidence，wereconsciousofthesocialevilswhichtheexecutionofsuchaplanwouldproduce。ItwillbetotheeternalgloryofAlexandertohaveansweredtherequestoftheLithuaniannobilitybyadecreebywhich，whilstallowingtheestablishmentoflocalcommitteesfortheelaborationofmeasureswhichmightachievetheemancipationinview，heplainlydeclaredthattheliberatedserfsoughttobesecuredatleastinthepossessionoftheirhomesteadsandofthelandbelongingtothesehomesteads（theso-calledhomestead-land——ousadebnaiiazemlia）。Thisexpressionwasobscureandambiguous，foritwasnoteasytoestablishthelimitsoftheso-calledhomestead-land。Wasittobeconsideredasacompoundofallthevariouscommunalprivilegesofwhichthepeasantwaspossessed，ortomeanonlythegrounddirectlysurroundinghishabitation？Thisquestionremainedunsettled。
Inthewinterof1851thenobilityofPetersburg，notwishingtoremainbehindthatofLithuania，presentedtotheEmperoranaddressveryliketheonejustmentioned。Thisaddressandthedecreeitprovokeddeservetobementioned，fortheyshow，ononehand，thedesireofthearistocracytopreservenotonlyalltheadvantagesofaland-owningclass，butalsotoacertainextentthesocialdependenceunderwhichthepeasanthadlivedtowardsthemduringtheprecedingcenturies；and，ontheotherhand，thefirmdecisionoftheGovernmenttosecuretothepeasantatleasthispropertyinthehomesteadheoccupied，andinthelandwhichsurroundedit。ThedecreeiscurioustooasaprecisestatementoftheconditionsonwhichtheGovernmentintendedatfirsttoaccomplishthedifficulttaskofemancipation。Theyare，asyouwillsoonperceive，verydifferentfromthoseonwhichtheemancipationwasactuallyperformed。NoquestionismadeofthedirectinterferenceoftheStateinordertobuybackfromthenoblemantheplotsofgroundoccupiedbytheserfs。Thisendistobealoneattainedbywayoffreeagreementbetweentheparties。Aslongasthisagreementhasnottakenplacetheserfistocontinuetoperformtheagriculturallabourandmakethemoneypaymentsfixedbylaw。Thenobleman，ontheotherhand，exercises，asinthepast，akindoffeudaljusticeandpolice。
Thegroundofthewholemanorisdeclaredtobehisproperty；thepeasantistoreceivenootherendowmentbutthatofhishomestead。
ThenobilityofNijni-Novgorod，thatofMoscow，andofseveralotherprovinces，soonafterthispresenteddemandsnotveryunlikethosealreadymentioned。Theywereansweredinthesameway，andlocalcommittees，imposedofnoblemen，wereaccordinglyformed，inordertoelaboratetheoutlinesoftheintendedreforminaccordancewiththeviewsoftheGovernmentasalreadystated。Theseoutlinesweretobesentforfurtherexaminationtoacentralboard，whichwasfirstappointedonJanuary8，1858，andwasknownunderthenameofthe\"PrincipalCommitteeonthePeasantQuestion。\"TheywerealsotobethesubjectofcarefulstudyonthepartofanewlyopenedsectionoftheBoardofStatistics。Menofradicalideas，suchasNicolasMiliutineandSoloviev，wereincludedamongitsmembers。Thereactionaryparty，ontheotherhand，countedmorethanonememberinthe\"PrincipalCommitteeonthePeasantQuestion\"，afactwhichinducedtheGovernmenttodetachfromthisCommitteetwoespecialsections，theso-called\"CommitteefortheDrawing-upoftheReformProject，\"andthatof\"TheElaborationofFinancialMeasures，neededtosecuretheExecutionofthePlaninView。\"TheguidanceofbothCommitteesandtheelectionoftheirmemberswereentrustedtoGeneralRostovzov，anavowedfriendoftheintendedreform。Animportantchangewasintroducedintotheworkingofthebureaucraticmachinerybythefactthatsomeelectedmembersoftheprovincialcommitteeswereallowedtohaveaseatatthemeetingsofthecentralbodies，andtoexercisetherethefunctionsofexperts。Amongthepersonssoappointedwefindseveralwell-knownSlavophiles，suchasSamarinandTcherkasky。
Theworkthecentralcommitteeshadtoperformwas，firstofall，thedrawing-upofaconcisestatementoftheresultsattainedbythedeliberationsofthelocalcommittees；next，thediscussionofthedifferentopinionswhichtheselatterhadexpressed；and，finally，thedrawing-upoftheconclusionstowhichthemembersofthecentralcommitteesthemselveshadarrived。Themembersofthecommitteesenjoyedthehithertounknownfreedomofexpressingtheiropinion，andofconsultingallsortsofpapersandbooks，notexcludingeventhosepublishedbyRussianemigrants。OneofthemembersprotestingagainsttheideaofdrawinginformationfromtheKolokol，aRussiannewspaperpublishedinLondonbythepoliticalrefugeeHerzen，thePresidentsaidthat，accordingtohisopinion，truthwastobetakenintoaccount，whoevermighthaveexpressedit。Theformalismandofficialsubordinationsomuchobservedbyourbureaucracywereforthefirsttimelaidaside，andeachmemberfranklyexpressedhisviews，howevermuchtheymightbeopposedtothoseofthePresident。ThecommitteeevenwentsofarastoacceptoncertainpointsdecisionswhichwerenotinaccordancewiththeImperialdecrees。ThelocalcommitteeappointedbythenobilityofTverwasthefirsttoexpresstheopinionthatthepeasantsoughttobeendowedwithlandbeyondthatwhichsurroundedtheirhomesteads。Thisopinionwasendorsedbythecentralcommittee，whichmaintainedthat，althoughitwascontradictorytotheletteroftheImperialdecrees，itwasinperfectcorrespondencewiththeirspirit。
Onanotheroccasionthe\"CommitteefortheDrawing-upoftheSchemeofReform\"showedthesameindependencebyadoptingtheviewfirstputforwardbymembersofthepress，thatitwasnecessarythattheGovernmentshouldcomeforwardtobuyupthelandwhichthenoblemanwascalledupontosurrendertothepeasantsofhismanor。NowthisviewwasquitethereverseofthatexpressedbytheImperialdecreeswehavepreviouslycited。
Inthewholeofthemovementthelargeandimportantpartplayedbythepublicpressismoststriking。Nodoubtcanbeentertainedthatatitsbeginningtheofficialstowhomwasentrustedtheelaborationoftheplanwereprofoundlyignorantofthebearingsofthequestion。ThePresidentoftheCommittee，GeneralRostovzov，franklyacknowledgedthisignorance，andinhisprivatecorrespondencewiththeCzarbetrayedhisfearsofanationalbankruptcyasthecertainresultoftheGovernmenttakingonitselftheredemptionofthelandswhichweretobecededtothepeasants——fearswhichseemalmostludicrousnowthatthisredemptionhasbeeneffected，andthefinancialinterestsoftheStatehavenotsufferedevenforamoment。
Awell-knownRussianeconomist，ProfessorIvanukoff，（3*）hastriedtoshowtowhatextentthepresssharedwiththeGovernmentthedifficulttaskofelaboratingthescheme，accordingtowhichtheserfsweretoobtain\"freedomandland。\"Heisquitecorrectwhenhesaysthat，withtheexceptionofasinglepapercalledtheJournalofLandedProprietors，thewholeRussianPressunanimouslydeclareditselfinfavour，notonlyoftheabolitionofpersonalservitude，butalsooftheendowmentofthepeasantswithland。SuchwritersasKatkof，thewell-knowneditoroftheMoscowGazette，amanwhohaslatelyplayedsoprominentapartinthereactionarymovement，werethentheopenfriendsofLiberalism，andrivalledthemostadvancedreformersintheirdefenceofcivilfreedom。TheopinionsofKatkofweresogreatlyatvariancewiththoseoftheGovernmentatthebeginningofthemovement，thathewasobligedtobringtoacloseaseriesofarticlesonthesocialconditionoftheserfswhichhehadbeguninhisperiodical，theRussianCourier。Anothereminentpublicist，Koschelev，whowastheauthorofoneofthenumerousprivateschemesofemancipation（theirnumberamountedtosixty-one），wasobligedatthesametimetoabandonthefurtherpublicationofajournalcalledtheWelfareoftheCountry，onaccountofthestronglanguageinwhichheadvocatedtheendowmentoftheliberatedserfwiththoseportionsofthelandalreadyinhispossession。ARussianmagazineofgreatrenown，theContemporary，wasatthesametimeonthepointofbeingsuppressedonaccountofanarticlewrittenbyProfessorKavelin，expressinghisviewsastotheopportunenessofredeemingthelandsactuallypossessedbythepeasants，andthat，too，withthedirecthelpoftheState。TheMinisterofPublicinstruction，EvgrafKovalevsky，wasevenaskedtoissueacircular，bywhichthecensorshipwasentrustedwiththepowerofsuppressinganyarticle，pamphlet，orbook，dealingwiththequestionofenfranchisement，thathadnotpreviouslybeenapprovedbythecentralcommittee。Thisuntimelywarfareagainstpublicopinionandthelibertyofthepress，fortunatelyenough，didnotlastlong。ThecircularwasprintedinApril，1858，andsevenmonthslatertheGovernmentrelaxedtherestrictionsimposed；andthatbecauseofthecompletechangeinitsownviewsastotheoutlinesofthereform。TheopinionsrecentlysuppressedbecamethoseoftheGovernment，andtheprosecutedwriterswereconsidered，forawhileatleast，itssurestallies。Iinsistonthesefacts，becauseIknowofnoinstancewhichbettercharacterisestheordinaryproceedingsoftheRussianbureaucracy。Itbegins，asarule，bysuppressingallthatliesinitsway，andthen，findingnootherissue，itadoptsthelineofconductwhichithasrecentlycondemned。Aforeignerwhohasnonotionofthismodeofproceduremustfindgreatdifficultyinunderstandinghowithappensthatinacountrywherenofreedomofthepressisrecognised，inwhichgeneralsandhighofficialsseemalonetohavetherightofprofessingopinionsonpublicmatters，thepress，nevertheless，hasmorethanonceexercisedadecisiveinfluenceonthecourseofpolitics。Theall-powerfulbureaucracyisveryoftenbutanempty-headedfool，anxioustoaccepttheideasofthedespisedandprosecutedjournalist。InRussia，aswellaseverywhereelse，thetrueandlastingpoweristhatofpublicopinion，andofthosewhoknowhowtoinfluenceit。PeriodsinwhichtheGovernmentactscontrarytopublicopinionoccurfromtimetotime。Theyareveryharmfultothosewhodaretoremainfaithfultotheiropinions。Forawhilenothingisheardofbuttheneedofsuppressionbothofopinionsandofthosewhopubliclyprofessthem。ButtimepassesandtheGovernmentbeginstoreapthefruitsofitsownsowing。Ateverystepittakes，itfindsonthepartofthoseitgovernsnothingbutill-will，ahiddenbutprofoundmistrust。Assoonasitfeelsthatitislosingallholdonthemindsandheartsofthepeople，itisthefirsttocondemnwhatithasrecentlypraised。Somefinemorningeverybodyisstalledbylearningthattheverymenwhohaddonetheirbesttorenderimpossiblethepublicexpressionofcertainideasarenowdrawingtheirinspirationfromthesesameideas。
ButIfeelthatIhavemadeperhapsanecessary，butatalleventsatoolong，digressionfromthedirectlineofmyinquiries。Iwillthereforereturntothematonce，andbeginbypointingoutthosepointsonwhichthecommitteeappointedtoelaboratethelawofenfranchisementcarriedoutintheirscheme——theopinionsofthepress。
Itwasthepresswhichfirstadvocatedthenotionthattheliberatedpeasantoughttobecometheownerofthelandactuallyinhispossession。SchemesforrealisingthisideahadbeenalreadyworkedoutinthereignofNicholasbysomepatrioticscholarsandpublicists。AmongthemwasProfessorKavelin，whoseprojectwaspublishedbytheRussiancontemporary，attheheadofotherarticles，ontheimpendingreform。ItwasonKavelinthatfirstfelltheresponsibilityofexpressingideasinoppositiontotheviewsoftheGovernment。HisopinionastothenecessityofendowingthepeasantwithlandsoonfoundanechointhedebatesofthenobilityofTver，whopetitionedtheCzartoextendhispromiseconcerninggrantsoflandtotheenfranchisedserf，notonlytohishomesteadandthegroundsurroundingit，butalsotothesharesthepeasantpossessedintheopenfieldsofthevillage。Ingivinganaccountofthedifferentopinionsexpressedbytheprovincialnobility，thecentralcommitteereferredtothisschemeproposedbythenobilityofTver，andrecommendedittotheGovernment。Thusweseehowprominentapartthepressplayedonthisoccasion。
Itsinfluencewasnolesspowerfulinthequestiononwhatprincipleshouldbebasedthefutureownershipexercisedbythepeasants。Twoschemes，widelydifferingfromeachother，wereatthesametimeproposedbythepress。Theone（chieflysupportedbyeconomistssuchasVernadsky，andpublicistslikeKatkof）
recommendedtheimmediateacceptanceofmeasuresfavourabletothedevelopmentofprivateproperty；theother（supportedbythemajorityoftheSlavophileandRadicalpress）wasinfavourofthestrictmaintenanceofthevillagecommunitysystem，withitsperiodicalredistributionofland。Onthisquestion，SlavophilessuchasSamarinandKoschelevwenthandinhandwiththeSocialistTchernishevsky，theauthoroftheveryremarkableessayonthe\"PrejudicesofPoliticalEconomistsagainsttheCommonOwnershipinLand，\"anessaywhichformsthebaseofthesocialcreedoftheso-calledNihilists。
TheprojectofemancipationelaboratedbyGovernmentofficialsisasortofcompromisebetweenthesecontradictoryopinions。Itstartswiththeideaofatemporarymaintenanceofthecommonownershipinland，butadvocatescertainmeasuresfavourabletothedevelopmentofprivateproperty。Anewredistributionofthesharesisallowedonlywhenitisdemandedbytwo-thirdsofthepersonsvotingatthevillageAssembly。
EverypersonpayingbacktotheGovernmentthemoneyadvancedtohim，inordertoremuneratethelandlordforthegroundhehasbeenobligedtoyield，isimmediatelyacknowledgedtobetheprivateproprietorofhisshare。TheschemeoftheSlavophilesandtheRadicalsrequiredasimplemajoritytomakelegalthevillagedecisionconcerninganewre-distributionoftheland；
theywere，andarestill，opposedtotherecognitionofprivatepropertyonthepartofthepeasantwhohasboughtbackhisshareinthecommonland。
Veryimportant，too，wastheservicerenderedbythepressontheimportantquestionoftheamountoflandwhichthefeudallordshouldberequiredtoleaveinthehandsofhisliberatedserfs。Mostwriterswereinfavourofleavingtothepeasantsthequantityoflandtheyactuallyoccupied；\"for，\"saidthey，andnotwithoutreason，\"thisamountmust，nodoubt，correspondtothenecessitiesoftheirexistence，astheamounthasbeenaccordedtothembythelandlordfornootherpurposebutthatofmerelysupportinglife。\"Fewadvocatedthedesirabilityofestablishingineachprovinceacertainmaximumandminimumoflanddonation。Themembersofthecentralcommitteewerefavourabletothefirstscheme；andifthelastprevailed，andfounditsexpressioninthelaw，theexplanationistobefoundintheoppositionwhichthefirstplanmetwithonthepartofthenobilityandtheirchiefsupportersinthehigherofficialcircles。
Oneimportantquestionarose，whetherthelandlordshouldstillkeepacertainexecutiveauthoritywithinthelimitsofthetownship；orwhethertheinnerlifeofthevillagewasthenceforthtobesubjecttonootherrulesthanthoseissuedbythevillageAssemblyandputinforcebyitselectedchiefs，theeldersorstarostas。Thepressalmostunanimouslyexpresseditsdesiretoseetherealisationofthelatterplan。Thecountrypeople，saidthepress，requiredcompleteliberty，or，tousethepopularexpression，\"pureliberty。\"NowthislibertywasinconsistentwiththemaintenanceofrightssuchasthoseexercisedbytheGermannoblemenintheBalticprovincesorthejunkersofEasternPrussia。Theonlywaytorenderanyrevivalofpersonalservitudeimpossiblewastoestablishthesystemofpeasantself-government。Opinionsdifferedonthequestionastowhetherthelandlordoughttobeamemberofthetownshipornot。
TheRadicalswereagainstit，andtheSlavophilesdidnotattachgreatimportancetoit，thinkingthatthelandlordwouldfeelhimselfquiteisolatedamidthecrowdofhisformersubjects。TheLiberalsalonewerefavourabletotheideaofincreasingthenumberoftownshipmembersbyadmittingallresidents，withoutdistinctionofclass，tovoteinthevillageAssembly。Theiradvicedidnotprevail，andthecommunebecameaclassinstitution，tothegreatdisadvantagebothofthepeasantsandofthewholeState。
Oneofthemostdifficultpointswasundoubtedlythatoffixingtheamountofremunerationwhichthelandlordoughttoreceive，notforthelossofhisrightoverthepersonofhisformerserf，butforthatofthelandhewasobligedtocedeinhisfavour。Thequestionwasthemoredifficultbecausetheland，inmorethanonepartofRussia，hadreallynomarketpriceatall，thenobilityandgentrybeingaloneallowedtobidforit。
Thepress，reasonablyenough，insistedonthenecessityofestablishingacorrespondencebetweentherevenuethepeasantgotfromhisshareandtheamountofremunerationpaidforittothelandlord。Butsuchwasnottheopinion，eitherofthecentralorlocalcommittees；andwemustlayontheirshoulderstheresponsibilityofthefact，thatitwastheamountofpaymentsinkindandthequantityofvillein-serviceperformedbythepeasant，whichwereselectedasthebaseofvaluation。Thiscertainlywasagainsttheinterestsofthepeasant，highlyoverchargedashewasbythemanoriallord，whoobligedhimtopayrentsmuchsurpassingtherevenueofthelandhecultivated。
Bynotadoptingonthispointtheviewsentertainedbythepress，thereformers，asyoueasilysee，didagreatsocialinjustice。
ItwasthepressalsowhichfirstagitatedthequestionofthedesirabilityofthedirectinterferenceoftheGovernment，inordertofacilitatetheexpropriationofthenoblemaninfavourofthepeasants。Theheadofthecentralcommittee，Rostovzov，aswehavealreadyseen，thoughtthefinancialdifficultiesofsuchameasureinsurmountable。Suchwasnottheopinionofthepress，whichpredictedthattheissueof\"rentes，\"orGovernmentbonds，securingtothelandlordacertainpercentageonthecapitalwhichheshouldcedetothepeasantintheformofland，wouldnotlowerthevalueofthepapermoneyalreadyincirculation。Itwasfortunatethatintheendthismethodwasadopted，fortheprophecywasnotonlyrealised，buttheinterestsofagriculture，andconsequentlyofthecountrygenerally，wereconsiderablyadvancedbythecapitalpaidintheformofthesebondstotheexpropriatedlandlords。Morethanonegreatlandownerwasdeeplyindebtatthetimeemancipationtookplace；veryfewhadthecapitalneededfortheeconomicarrangementsrequiredforthesubstitutionofthepaidworkofthefreepeasantfortheunpaidworkoftheserf。Theyobtaineditbysellingormortgagingthe\"rentes\"orbondspaidtothembytheGovernment。
Wethereforefindthatonallpointsthepresswastheguide，theauthoritativeadviser，thesureallyoftheGovernment。ThislastcharacterplainlyappearedinthestrugglewhichthecentralcommitteehadtomaintainwiththedelegatesoftheprovincialCommittees。Thesebodieswerecomposedexclusivelyofmembersofthelocalnobility，andwereempoweredtopresenttheiropinionsontheimpendingreform。UnconsciousofthealterationwhichhadtakenplaceintheintentionsoftheGovernment，theyexpressedideasincompleteaccordwiththoseatfirstentertainedbytheEmperor。Themajorityineachcommittee，seeingthatitwasimpossibleunderpresentcircumstancestomaintaintheiroldrightsoverthepersonoftheserf，consentedtorecognisehisfreedom，andthatwithoutpay。Theywereanxiousaboutonethingalone——toretainasfaraspossibleintheirownhandsthelandactuallypossessedbythepeasant。Thisfeelingwasthestrongerwherethesoilwasrich，aswasthecaseintheCentralandSouthernGovernments，wheretheblacksoilprevails。Itwaslesssointhewestandnorth，wherethegroundyieldedbutasmallrent。Wefindacompleteunanimitybetweentheutterancesofthecentralandsouthernnobles，bothinsistingonthenecessityoflimitingtheexpropriationofthelandinfavourofthepeasantstothatoccupiedbytheirhomesteads，whilstinthenorthmorethanonecommitteeconsentedtoextendthistothearablelandandtheundividedcommon。
Theprovincialcommitteeswerealmostunanimous（Ispeakofcourseonlyofthemajorityoftheirmembers）intheirrequestthattheindividualsharesofeachpeasanthouseholdshouldbereadjustedaccordingtoacertainmaximumandminimumfixedforeachprovince。Manyacommitteeinsistedonthemaintenanceoffeudalpolice，ifnotoffeudaljustice，andallshowedanequalinterestinthesuppressionoftheuncontrolledpowerofthebureaucracyinmattersofprovincialadministration。
Theminoritiesofalmosteverycommittee，whoweremoreorlessinfluencedbythepress，approachedmuchmorenearlyintheirrequesttotheviewsentertainedbythemajorityinthecentralcommittee。Theygavetheirconsenttotheplanofexpropriatinginfavourofthepeasantsapartofthenoblemen’slands；theyinsistedontheparticipationoftheGovernmentintheactofredeemingtheareaformerlyallottedbythelandlordstotheserfsoftheirrespectivemanors；theystronglyopposedtheschemeofatransitorystateinwhichthepeasant，unabletobuybackthelandheowned，wascondemnedtocontinuehisvilleinserviceandhisfeudalduesorpaymentsinkind。AtthesametimetheyputforwardcertaingeneraldemandswhichwentmuchbeyondthepromisesalreadygivenbytheGovernment。Theymaderequestsforageneralchangeintheexistingsystemofprovincialadministration。Accordingtothesebureaucracyshouldgiveplacetoasystemoflocalself-government。Theyinsistedonthenecessityofamendingthedeficientjudicialorganisation。Theydemandedtrialbyjuryandlibertyofthepress。SomeofthememberswentevensofarastodrawuparesolutioninfavourofthegeneralrepresentationofthepeopleandtherevivaloftheancientsystemofNationalCouncils，theSobors。
WemustnotlosesightofthesepoliticalrequirementsifwewishtounderstandwhyitwasthattheGovernment，assoonasthedeputiesbothofthemajorityandtheminorityofprovincialcommitteeswereassembledinPetersburg，hinderedtheirgeneralmeetings。Itwasbutseparatelythateachofthedelegateswasadmittedtoputforwardhisrequests，andtogiveoraladvicetothemembersofthegeneralcommittee。ThismistrustonthepartoftheGovernmentembitteredmorethanoneofthedelegatesagainstthemembersofthecentralcommittee，andthrewthemintothearmsofthatminoritywhich，inthecentralcommitteeitself，defendedtheinterestsofthenobility。Itwaschieflycomposedofthe\"Marshal\"ofthePetersburgnobility，CountPeterSchouvalov，MrAprakasin，whooccupiedthesamepostintheGovernmentofOrel，andMrPosen，thedelegateofPultawa。Thesethreegentlemeninsistedonthedesirabilityofkeepingthelandinthehandsofthenobility，andofgrantingtothepeasantryonlyasortofsoccage-tenure，or\"censive，\"onthelandtheyoccupied。WhilstthemajorityofthecommitteeinsistedonthedirectinterferenceoftheGovernmentintheredemptionofthenoblemen’sland，andtheproprietyofputtinganendtovillein-service，atanyrateafteraperiodoftwelveyears，thesegentlemenwereinfavourofleavingtoafreecontract，enteredintobythemanoriallordandhisformerserfs，thedifficulttaskofsettlingtheirfuturerelations。ItwasinthehouseofSchouvalovthatthediscontenteddelegatesregularlyassembled；itwastherethattheydrewupthisprotestagainsttheactionofthecentralcommitteeandtheso-called\"encroachmentsofthebureaucracy。\"Theirappeal，madeintheformofapamphlet，publishedinLeipsig，andaddressedtothenewdelegatessummonedtoPetersburgfromtheprovincesnothithertorepresented，foundareadyhearing，andtheGovernmentencounteredinthesenewhelpersevenalargeramountofmistrustandill-willthanthatalreadyshownbytheirpredecessors。
Thistimetheoppositionofthenobilitywasofmuchgreaterconsequence。GeneralRostovzov，whoseinfluenceovertheCzarwasverygreat，diedsuddenly，beforethecompletionoftheworkentrustedtohiscare，andCountPanin，anavowedfoetotheactionofthecommittee，becameitsPresident。Hedidhisbesttoinducethememberstoabandontheirformerdecision；anditisonlytothefirmnessofcharactershownbymenlikeNicholasMilutine，thatweareindebtedforthestrictmaintenanceofthegeneraloutlinesoftheformalreadyelaborated。Findinghimselfpowerlesstochangethedecisionsofthecommittee，Panintriedtoarousesomeoppositiontotheschemepublishedbyit，amongtheranksofthatgeneralcommitteeofwhichthecommitteefortheelaborationofthelawofemancipationwasbutasection。HetriedtoachievethesameendsintheCouncilofState，wheretheschemeofthenewlawhadfinallytobediscussed。Happilythetimeallowedforthedebateswasverylimited，astheGovernmentinsistedontheimmediaterealisationofthelong-promised\"liberty。\"Theylastedinthegeneralcommitteebutafewmonths，whileintheCouncilofStatetheywerelimitedtoafortnight。
Itisduetothisfactthatneitherofthetwoboardsintroducedveryextensiveamendmentsintheemancipationlaw。Thosetheydidmakewereallinfavourofthenobility。Themostmischievousconsistedintheconsiderablediminutionofthemaximumandminimumsharesaccordedtothepeasant，andintheresolutionthatnorightswouldberecognisedasbelongingtothevillagersinthecommonpasturesofthemanor。Theinterestsofthepeasantswerealsosacrificedinthepermissionwhichwasgiventothelandlordstodiminishthesharesofthepeasants，ontheconditionofrenouncingallremunerationforthegroundwhichtheyceded。Inallthesemeasuresthedemandsofthenobleswerecompliedwith。
Butthegreatendsatwhichthereformersaimed，theliberation，thatistosay，ofthepeasantfromallpersonaldependenceonthemanoriallord，andthesecuringtohimtherightofpossessinglandincommon，wereneverthelessattained。
ThelawofFebruary19，1861，wasthebeginningofanewera——
aneraofdemocraticdevelopment，aswellasofeconomicandsocialgrowth，fortheimmenseEmpireoftheCzars。Forthereisnodoubtaboutthevastinfluencewhichthelawof1861hasexercisedinalldirections。Itisthatwhichmademorethantwentymillionsofpeopleatoncethefreedisposersoftheirowndestiniesandthecommunisticownersoftheland。Villeinservices，rentsinkindandinmoney，feudalmonopolies，andmanorialjurisdiction，ceasedtoexist，andthepeasantbecamethememberofaself-governingbody，ortheMir。Theideasofsocialjusticeandofequalitybeforethelaw——ideashithertocherishedbutbyafewdreamerssuchasRadischevandHerzen，orrevolutionistslikethoseso-called\"Decembrists，\"whoorganisedtherebellionofDecember24，1825——madetheirtriumphantentryintotheRussianworld，workingacompletechangeintheorganisationofpublicschools，admittingthesonofthepeasanttositsidebysidewiththesonofthenoblemanandthemerchantinthesamegrammarschoolandthesameuniversity，revolutionisingbothofficialcirclesandthedrawing-room，admittingtobothpersonsoflow。birthbuthigheducation。
Theemancipationoftheserfcertainlywasnotcarriedoutwithoutsomelosstotheland-owninggentry，butthesquiresoonrecoveredfromthestateintowhichhewasbroughtbyhisinexperienceinthemanagementofhisestatewithoutthehelpofunpaidservants。Capitalwasinvestedinland；agriculturalmachineswereintroduced；theyearlyincomebegantoriserapidly，andwithitthevalueofthelandwasaugmented。Itwaspartlyenhancedbythefactthatitwasthrownopentothefreepurchaseofallclassesofsociety，whileprevioustothereformthehigherclassalonewasentitledtoownit。Insteadofabandoningthetillageofthefields，accordingtotheexpectationofsomepessimists，theliberatedserfsoonbecametheregularfarmerofthelandspossessedbythegentry，andentirevillagecommunitieshavebeenseenduringtheselastfewyearsrenting，underconditionsofmutualresponsibility，thelandofaneighbouringestate。
IfweinvestigatetheindirectresultsofthegreatreformaccomplishedbytheEmperorAlexander，wearefirststruckbythefactthatitinvolvedthenecessityofacompletechangeinprovincialadministration。Justiceandpolicehadhithertobeeninthehandsofpersonselectedbythenobility。Thiscouldnolongerbetoleratedthemomenttheserfwasliberatedfromhisprevioussubjectiontothenobleandsquire。Asystemofprovincialself-government，basedontheprincipleofrepresentationofthewholeland-owningclass，bothprivateproprietorsandthosepossessinglandincommon，wasintroducedinitsstead。Theorganizationofjusticewascompletelychanged，learnedjuristsoccupyingtheplaceoftheignorantmagistratesofoldwhohadbeenappointedbytheprovincialgentry。Thepeople，asmembersofjuries，wereadmittedtoashareintheexerciseofcriminaljustice。ThetransformationofthemedievalStateintoonethatansweredtotherequirementsofmoderncivilisationwouldhavebeencompletediftheLiberatorofmillionshadnotbeenslaughteredontheverydayonwhichhehadundertakentogiveaconstitutiontohispeople。
Yearsofviolentreactionhavefollowed。Thefeudalparty，whosesecretdesignshadbeendefeatedbythemodeinwhichemancipationhadbeeneffected，againgottheupperhand；andmodernRussianowlooksbacktotheperiodof1861asthegoldenageofRussianLiberalism。ItisintheworkofthemenwhoweredirectlyengagedincarryingoutthegreatreformthatRussianLiberalsseekconsolationandhelp；andtheNineteenthofFebruaryhasbecomeforthemadayofgeneralandofgratefulcommemoration。
NOTES：
1。CompareV。Somevsky，\"ThePeasantQuestioninRussiaduringtheEighteenthandNineteenthCentury\"，Petersburg，1888。
2。\"TheVillagefromPetersburgtoNovgorod。\"
3。Seehiswork，entitled\"TheFallofBondageinRussia，\"
Petersburg，1883。
