Vladimir Putin and Dmitry Medvedev
laid flowers at the monument
Pyotr Stolypin. 12/27/2012.
based on materials from the website "Government of Russia"

For the construction of a monument to P.A. Stolypin in Moscow donations collected 1095in the amount of RUB 27,586,639.14.

Union 17 October. / K.A. Soloviev

"Union 17 October"- a party representing the right wing of Russian liberalism at the beginning of the 20th century. The first steps towards its organization were taken at the end of October 1905. The core of the party was the minority of participants in the Zemstvo Congress in Moscow in November 1905, who refused to sign its general political resolution. On November 9, 1905, the first version of the party program was published in the Slovo newspaper. On February 8-12, 1906, the first congress of “S. 17 O.” in Moscow. By the fall of 1906, the composition of “S. 17 O.” included the Commercial and Industrial Party, the Party of Legal Order, the Constitutional-Monarchical Legal Union, the Manifesto Party of October 17 in Ivanovo-Voznesensk, the Party “For the Tsar and Order” in Kaluga and others. “S. 17 O.” was conceived as a unification of all centrist forces. The associations that joined it were not dissolved, but continued to exist within the framework of “S. 17 O.” Membership in "S. 17 O.” did not impose any special obligations, including the payment of party dues. In 1906 the party had 260 local branches. The total number of "S. 17 O.” reached 75-77 thousand people. The Octobrists enjoyed particular influence in the zemstvo provinces. Social basis of the party: large landownership and business circles. A significant role in the capitals was played by the German groups “S. 17 O.” In 1906-1907, 53.22% of party members were hereditary nobles, 21.99% were merchants and hereditary honorary citizens. By occupation, 48.96% of Octobrists are officials, more than 31% are representatives of business circles. Already after July 1906, the organizational structure of the party began to disintegrate: about a quarter of the local branches of “S.17 O.” ceased to exist, the size of the association noticeably decreased. In "S. 17 O.” In parallel, there were two Central Committees - Moscow and St. Petersburg. They included A.I. Guchkov, N.I. Guchkov, P.A. Geiden, V.I. Guerrier, P.L. Korf, M.V. Krasovsky, Yu.N. Milyutin, V.M. Petrovo-Solovovo, M.A. Stakhovich, N.A. Khomyakov, D.N. Shipov and others. At the Second Party Congress in May 1907, a decision was made to create a single Central Committee headquartered in Moscow. In 1906, the number of printed organs of the party reached 50. Newspapers were published in Russian, German, and Latvian languages, including “Voice of Moscow”, “Izvestia of the Moscow Club P. 17 O.” etc.

Ideological foundations of the program “S. 17 O.” “rooted” in the zemstvo movement of the mid-1890s - 1905. As stated by A.I. Guchkov at the Third Party Congress on October 4, 1909, “P. 17 O.” Historically, he emerged from the ranks of the liberal zemstvo opposition, which, in the fight against administrative oppression and reactionary elements, defended the rights of self-government and modest cultural endeavors. These same forces took part in the manifestations that led to the resolution of the political crisis in 1905; perhaps it was their presence that gave impressiveness to these manifestations, ensuring their success" (Party "S. 17 O." M., 2000. T. 2. P. 85). The “Conversation” circle (1899-1905) played a significant role in the emergence of organizational and ideological prerequisites for the formation of the party. In the course of his activities, strong ties were established between various circles of the zemstvo liberal opposition; an ideological compromise was also found between moderate zemstvo constitutionalists (P.A. Heiden, V.M. Petrovo-Solovo, etc.) and supporters of the neo-Slavophile concept of power (M.A. Stakhovich, D.N. Shipov, etc.). Both of them agreed with the need for an institutional transformation of the Russian political system, insisting on the establishment of nationwide representation. However, the question of the nature of the power of the new institution was deliberately not discussed by them in order to avoid possible disagreements.

A significant impetus for the organizational unity of the new force was the Manifesto of October 17, 1905, which, due to its ambiguity, contributed to the consolidation of various social circles ready for a constructive dialogue with the authorities. In "S.17 O." the prevailing interpretation of the Manifesto of October 17 as a constitutional charter that gave rise to a new state system in Russia. However, this point of view was not the only one. “The left wing of our union prefers to call the new government structure Russia has a moderate constitution. The right wing sees in it a modified autocracy in its further evolution. One thing is certain for both and for everyone: the words of the manifesto of February 20 (1905. - Ed.) that “a great transformation has taken place in the political system of our fatherland” are not false,” said D. A. Olsufiev on March 21, 1906 at meeting "S. 17 O.” (OPI GIM F.164 Op.1 D.54 L.32 vol.). Despite all the differences in views, the Octobrists agreed that Russia faced the dual task of systemic modernization of the country while maintaining the originality of its characteristic value guidelines.

Program "S. 17 O.” assumed the extension of broad civil and political freedoms to Russian citizens. “In a politically free state, civil freedom must also prevail, creating the only reliable basis for the comprehensive development of both the spiritual forces of the people and the natural productivity of the country. The Manifesto of October 17th places first priority on the granting of the unshakable foundations of civil freedom. The development and strengthening of these principles in legislation and rights is one of the most important tasks of the union” (Russian Liberals: Cadets and Octobrists. M., 1996. P. 61). Civil rights that were to be guaranteed by law included freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and association, movement, choice of place of residence and occupation. The inviolability of the person, home, correspondence, and property of citizens also had to be ensured. Moreover, these norms would have real power only in the case of modernization of the government itself, since it is possible to defend one’s rights only if there is an independent judicial system and a representative form of government. “The streamlining of forms of community life and the strengthening of civil freedom are possible only when the population of the country finds support and protection of all their rights in court and when the activities of administrative authorities are placed within the boundaries clearly outlined in the law” (Russian Liberals: Cadets and Octobrists. M., 1996 64). In order for the court to become an effective mechanism for upholding civil rights and freedoms, it must be fully independent, transparent and classless. The Octobrists insisted on the need to eradicate all vestiges of the previous clerical model of legal proceedings.

In the new conditions, zemstvos, which were also subject to radical transformation, acquired special importance. The Octobrists proposed expanding the sphere of competence of local governments, democratizing them, and introducing a small zemstvo unit - the volost zemstvo. The supposed "S. 17 O.” involvement of the broad masses in active political and social life was impossible without widespread education. Therefore, the Octobrists believed that perhaps the first task facing the Duma was the adoption of a law on universal primary education.

At the same time, the Octobrists were supporters of a strong central government and were principled opponents of the federalization of Russia. “A vital condition for strengthening the external power of Russia and for its internal prosperity is to protect the unity of its political body, to preserve the historically established unitary character of its state system” (Russian Liberals: Cadets and Octobrists. M., 1996, pp. 59-60). They proposed to grant special autonomy status only to Finland. However, such an attitude did not prevent the development of broad local self-government and the creation of favorable conditions for the existence of various national cultures and confessions.

The preservation of historically established political traditions also implied upholding the principle of monarchical sovereignty, when the source of all power in the country was the emperor, who gave the people a constitution and whose power was the guarantee of its implementation. According to the Octobrists, the monarchical principle ensured the continuity of power and contributed to the national unity of the country. It also fulfilled an important social function, being a non-class and supra-class force. The Slavophile rhetoric inherent in this case to the Octobrist program is characteristic, when the unity of the tsar and the people is opposed to the bureaucratic system of government of recent centuries: “The former unlimited Autocrat, omnipotent in theory, but bound in reality by all the shackles of the orderly system, weak due to the alienation of the people from him, becomes constitutional a monarch who, although he finds the limits of his will in the rights of popular representation, but in very unity with the people, in union with the land, in the new conditions of the state system, receives new power and a new high task of being the supreme leader of a free people" (Russian liberals: Cadets and Octobrists. M., 1996. pp. 60-61).

At the same time, Russia faced the need to carry out broad social reforms. First of all, this related to the peasant question. According to the program "S. 17 O.”, the solution to this issue was to increase the labor productivity of the Russian peasant. According to the Octobrists, this was impossible without ensuring its legal equality with all other classes Russian Empire. In addition, the state had to create the most favorable socio-economic conditions for the growth of agricultural productivity: it had to enable the peasant to freely leave the community, promote the development of small credit, facilitate the resettlement and resettlement of the rural population, legislatively regulate the existence of small land leases, initiate the development of inter-strip lands, transfer part of state lands to the benefit of peasants. The Octobrists did not exclude the possibility of alienation of privately owned lands in case of emergency. On May 7, 1907, at the Second Party Congress, the “land program” “S. 17. O.”, which involved the creation of an effective peasant farm and, in general, corresponded to the provisions of the agrarian reform of P.A. Stolypin.

Solving the working issue “S. 17 O.” saw in reforming legislation to limit the working hours of women and children, introducing insurance in case of illness, disability and death of the worker. The Octobrists also advocated freedom of activity for trade unions and the organization of strikes as a form of struggle for economic interests. However, this sphere of worker activity had to be regulated in a normative manner so that it did not cause damage to the state.

Broad social reform required significant funds. Taking this fact into account, “S. 17 O.” proposed reforming the tax system to equitably redistribute the burden of government spending. To do this, it was necessary to introduce a progressive scale of income taxation.

"WITH. 17 O.” adhered exclusively to parliamentary tactics of political struggle. At the same time, the electoral law of December 11, 1905 did not allow the party to achieve tangible success in the elections to the First and Second Dumas. During the election campaign to the First Duma, the Octobrists acted in alliance with the Party of Legal Order, the Progressive Economic Party, and the All-Russian Union of Trade and Industry. S. occupied a strictly centrist position. As M.A. Stakhovich stated at the first founding congress of the party: ““S. 17 O.” openly and sharply delimited himself on both flanks. We equally do not sympathize with the revolution and the reaction: both violent revolutionary actions and the breaking on the part of the government of the main principles of the Manifesto of October 17 seem equally illegal to us” (Shipov D.N. Memoirs and thoughts about the experience. M., 2007. P. 421). As a result, the Octobrists managed to bring in 16 deputies (including P.A. Heiden, M.A. Stakhovich, etc.), who found themselves on the far right flank of popular representation. Due to an unsuccessful election campaign, already in June 1906 in “S. 17 O.” The issue of reorganizing the party and creating a new association on the basis of the emerging Peaceful Renewal Party was discussed. "WITH. 17 O.” spoke out sharply against the signing of the Vyborg Appeal. The political course of the government of P.A. Stolypin was generally supported by the party. Leaders of S. 17 O.” the majority also reacted sympathetically to the establishment of military courts on August 19, 1906, which led to the departure of the leaders of the “peaceful renovationists” - P.A. - from the party. Heyden, M.A. Stakhovich, D.N. Shipova. In the Second Duma, the Octobrist faction consisted of 28 deputies (by the end of the session - 35), who blocked with the Group of Right and Moderates. The Octobrists opposed political amnesty, proved the unacceptability of the alienation of privately owned lands as the only possible solution to the agrarian question, and unequivocally condemned Act of terrorism. The unpreparedness of the Duma majority for dialogue with the government forced S. 17 O.” demand the dissolution of the legislative assembly.

The electoral law of June 3, 1907 allowed the Octobrists to significantly increase their representation in the Duma to 154 deputies. "WITH. 17 O.” took a leading position in the lower house, having the opportunity to enter into agreements with both the right and the Cadets, which often predetermined the outcome of the vote. The Octobrists were supporters of close cooperation with the government of P.A. Stolypin, contributing to the adjustment of all his most important reforms: in the field of agricultural, financial legislation, in the field of public education. In particular, many Octobrists insisted on limiting the use of the state of exception. The faction argued for the need to change the Rules on March 8, 1906. Also, the “Union of October 17” opposed the unjustified increase in taxation, as well as its uneven geographical distribution. According to A.I. Guchkov, said at the Third Congress of Octobrists on October 4, 1909, “there is not a single dark corner of government activity left that would not be mercilessly and brightly illuminated by representatives of our party. And we fought not only with the government: next to the government and above it, we pointed out the presence of harmful dark forces, very influential and irresponsible" (Party "Union of October 17": Protocols of the congress, conferences and meetings of the Central Committee of 1907-1915: In 2 volumes M., 2000. T. 2. P. 85).

The period of greatest influence of the Octobrists on the political life of the country coincided with the destruction of the organizational structure of “S. 17 O.” By 1909, about 90 local organizations remained, some of which actually no longer functioned. This forced the Octobrists to concentrate on Duma activities. However, disintegration tendencies also took place within the faction itself. Thus, in the spring of 1909, about 20 right-wing Octobrists left it (the so-called “Golobov incident”). The presence of centrifugal forces in the party of A.I. Guchkov subsequently explained that “in our internal party regime we are incorrigible republicans, even with some inclination towards anarchism. We take care of people's beliefs, questions of conscience, and the independence of their personality. This is a well-known psychological trait characteristic of the social movements from which we emerged. That is why it is so difficult for us to establish in our ranks the skills of that iron discipline, without which no serious political work is possible...” (Party “S. 17 O.”, M., 2000. T. 2. P. 445).

In 1909, the attitude of “S. 17 O.” to the government in connection with issues of military and religious policy of the state. In June 1909, in a personal conversation with cadet M.V. Chelnokov A.I. Guchkov admitted that “The Duma is quickly moving towards a conflict with the government, that Stolypin’s song is finished and it’s time to think about fairer relations with the opposition and the unification of all constitutional elements” (GARF. F. 810. Op. 1. D. 648. L. 14 ). P.A. Stolypin reacted sharply to changes in the position of the Octobrists. In a conversation with deputy A.A. Uvarov on October 17, 1909, he stated: “On the part of the center, I can only call such left-wing behavior as politicking and, moreover, of low quality, unworthy of serious statesmen. Consequently, I can treat leftward movement as nothing other than a very negative and undesirable phenomenon. The fact that, due to the new line of the center, the cabinet clearly broke with the latter, thereby remaining without the support of the majority, does not upset him much. Even if we assume that it does not exist now, then only one thing follows from this: it should be and probably will be. Finally, the government cannot be upset by the movement of the Octobrists to the left, and also because it, the government, is not the Octobrists. If it was based on the Octobrist majority in the State Duma, it was not because the government professed the Octobrist program, but because the views of it and the Octobrists on one issue or another coincided by chance” (P.A. Stolypin: Facets of Politician Talent. M., 2006 483).

The adoption in March 1911 of the law on zemstvos in the Western provinces as an extraordinary decree contributed to the growth of opposition sentiments among the Octobrists and called into question the very possibility of business cooperation between the faction and the government. On March 20, 1911, at a meeting with voters S.I. Shidlovsky commented on the reaction of “S. 17 O.” on the actions of the Cabinet of Ministers: “They wanted to call us to commit lawlessness, but we did not agree to it. Could we, in our constitutional struggle with the State Council, resort to the means that, unfortunately, the government used and thanks to them passed the law on Western Zemstvo? Could the people's representatives, so recently called to legislative activity, trample on the law? No, gentlemen, the Octobrists will never agree to this. We look at things differently. If we see how the law is being trampled before our eyes, then it is our sacred duty, our duty to the people to join the fight against this person" (October 17 Union Party: Protocols of the Third Congress, conferences and meetings of the Central Committee of 1907-1915: B 2 t. M., 2000. T. 2. P. 325-326).

Murder of P.A. Stolypin in September 1911 confronted the Octobrists with the need to generalize their political experience of the last five years. According to A.I. Guchkov, largely thanks to Stolypin, a constructive dialogue was established between the government and social forces, which was a unique phenomenon in the history of Russia: “The resulting picture was rare in our Russian life, unprecedented since the early 60s: two forces, forever, it seemed, those who were irreconcilably at odds with each other—the government and society—came closer and went the same way; society trusted the authorities; The authorities acutely felt the need for public support. In this act of reconciliation, P.A. played an outstanding role. Stolypin, who represented a completely exceptional combination of those qualities that were required by the modern moment. Thanks to his charming personality, the high qualities of his mind and character, an atmosphere of public goodwill and trust accumulated around the authorities in place of the previous hatred and suspicion" (Party "Union of October 17": Protocols of the Third Congress, conferences and meetings of the Central Committee of 1907-1915: In 2 vols. M., 2000. T. 2. P. 428). However, public calm led to a strengthening of the position of the forces of reaction, which sought to curtail the course of reforms. According to Guchkov, P.A. Stolypin was unable to defeat them, and after his death they finally triumphed, resulting in the virtual abolition of the united government, replaced by the traditional “personal regime” for Russia.

Elections to the Fourth Duma, during which the administration prevented the election of representatives of the left wing and the center “S. 17 O.”, significantly changed the balance of power in the lower house. The number of Octobrists dropped to 98 deputies. Prominent representatives of St. Petersburg were not included in the IV Duma. 17 O.”: A.I. Guchkov, P.V. Kamensky, M.Ya. Kapustin, A.V. Eropkin and others. New conditions prompted the party to change its tactical line. At the November 1913 conference, a significant majority adopted a resolution of a sharply oppositional nature, in which the government was accused of systematically violating the principles of constitutionalism and human rights proclaimed by the Manifesto of October 17, 1905. Disagreements in connection with this decision caused a split in the faction. The left wing insisted on the need to consider the decisions of the party conference binding on the faction, the right Octobrists refused to obey them, while the center called for a compromise. As a result, the faction split into the group “S. 17 O.” (left Octobrists), a group of independents (right Octobrists), a faction of Zemstvo-Octobrists (center). For a party focused on parliamentary means of political struggle, the lack of opportunity to influence its deputies called into question its existence. From this moment on, the number of meetings of the Central Committee was noticeably reduced. In the spring of 1914, the Central Committee discussed the possibility of creating a left center in the lower house in an alliance with the Cadets and Progressives. On July 1, 1915, publication of the leading organ “S. 17 O.” "Voices of Moscow". Soon after this, the Party Central Committee also stopped convening.

Lit.: Chermensky E.D. Bourgeoisie and tsarism in the first Russian revolution. M., 1970; Dyakin V.S. Autocracy, bourgeoisie and nobility in 1907-1911. L., 1978; Shelokhaev V.V. The Octobrist Party during the first Russian revolution. M., 1987; Political history of Russia in parties and persons. M., 1993; Wisniewski E. Liberal opposition in Russia on the eve of the First World War. M., 1993; Pavlov D.B. "Union of October 17" in 1905-1907: numbers and social composition. // National history. M., 1993. No. 6; Kharus O.A. Cadet and Octobrist organizations in Siberia: experience in reconstructing the sociocultural appearance // Historical Yearbook. Omsk, 1997; Soloviev K.A. The formation of liberal and conservative political parties and the First Russian Revolution // Revolution of 1905 – 1907: A look through a century. M., 2005; Brainerd M.D. The octobrists and the gentry, 1905-1907: leaders an followers? // The politics of rural Russia, 1905-1914. Bloomington - L., 1979; Emmons T. The formation of political parties and the first national elections in Russia. Cambridge – L., 1983.

Archive: GARF. F. 115 (“Union of October 17”); F. 555 (A.I. Guchkov); RGIA. F. 869 (Milyutins).

K.A. Soloviev .

Introduction

Activities of the Octobrists until February 1917

Conclusion

List of used literature

Introduction

The entry of Imperial Russia into the decisive phase of the modernization process at the turn of the 19th - 20th centuries. was characterized by a crisis of structures traditional society, attempts by the best representatives of government and the intelligentsia to direct the course of the political process towards the formation of the foundations of the rule of law. State reforms undertaken by the autocracy under the influence of the revolutionary upheavals of 1905 marked the beginning of the process of forming legal political parties of a liberal orientation. Their activities became the first experience in introducing the principles of constitutionalism into the political life of Russia.

The Union Party of October 17 (Octobrists) represented the conservative wing of the liberal movement and began to form in November 1905 from the moderate part of the zemstvo opposition movement, which recognized the Manifesto of October 17 as a turning point in the history of Russia.

The Octobrists declared their main goal to be “assistance to the government following the path of saving reforms.”

The Octobrists opened their program with the demand to preserve the unity and indivisibility of the Russian state, “its historically established unitary character.”

The social composition of the party was quite homogeneous. The large, predominantly Moscow commercial, industrial and financial bourgeoisie and landowners gravitated towards it. Among the Octobrists there were many retired military officials, professors, engineers, managers of private enterprises.

The work examines the political program of the Octobrists and their activities before the February Revolution of 1917.

Octobrist Union Party

Among right-wing (pro-government) parties, a prominent role in political life The country played the “Union of October 17” (Octobrists), adopted this name in honor of the Tsar’s Manifesto on October 17, 1905, which, as the Octobrists believed, marked Russia’s entry onto the path of a constitutional monarchy. The organizational development of the party began in October 1905, and ended at its First Congress, held on February 8-12, 1906 in Moscow. It was the party of big capital - the upper ranks of the commercial and industrial bourgeoisie and landowners - entrepreneurs. It was headed by a large Moscow homeowner and industrialist A.I. Guchkov, a “born politician,” a highly educated, brilliant speaker and publicist, extravagant, prone to adventurism.

The Octobrists set as their goal “to assist the government following the path of saving reforms.” They advocated a hereditary constitutional monarchy, in which the emperor, as the bearer of supreme power, was limited by the provisions of the Fundamental Laws. Opposing unlimited autocracy, the Octobrists were also against the establishment of a parliamentary system, as politically and historically unacceptable for Russia. They stood for the constitutional monarch retaining the title "autocratic"; provided for the introduction of two chambers of “people's representation” - the State Duma and the State Council, formed on the basis of qualification elections - direct in cities and two-tier in rural areas. Civil rights in the Octobrist program included freedom of conscience and religion, inviolability of person and home, freedom of speech, assembly, unions, and movement. On the national question, the Octobrists proceeded from the principle of preserving a “united and indivisible Russia”, opposing any form of “federalism”. They made an exception only for Finland, subject to its “state connection with the empire.” They allowed cultural autonomy for other peoples of Russia.

The social program of the Octobrists boiled down to the following. To resolve the agrarian question, they provided for the transfer to peasants through special land committees of empty state, appanage and cabinet lands, as well as assistance in the purchase of land by peasants “from private owners” through the Peasant Bank, and demanded the return to peasants of the plots produced from their plots in 1861. Octobrists They also allowed the “forced alienation” of part of privately owned lands with mandatory remuneration of the owners at the expense of the treasury. They advocated the regulation of rent, the resettlement of land-poor and landless peasants to “free lands”, demanded equal rights of peasants with other classes, and actively supported the Stolypin agrarian reform.

The Octobrists recognized the freedom of workers' organizations, unions, meetings and the right of workers to strike, but only on the basis of economic, professional and cultural needs, and at enterprises that “do not have state significance.” They advocated limiting the length of the working day, but not to the detriment of industrialists, introducing insurance for workers, and demanded a reduction in taxation of the population. They were supporters of expanding public education and declared the need for judicial and administrative reform.

The Octobrists envisioned the government structure as a constitutional monarchy with a State Duma. They advocated “strong monarchical power”, but for the need to carry out reforms that ensured freedom for bourgeois entrepreneurship. Freedom of industry, trade, acquisition of property and its protection by law are the main program demands of the Octobrists.

In 1905 - 1907 The Union of October 17 had up to 30 thousand members. Its publication was the newspaper "Voice of Moscow". In 1906, the Octobrists published up to 50 newspapers in Russian, German and Latvian.

Like the Cadet Party, the Union of October 17 was a very amorphous political formation, more like a discussion club, and even more so than the Cadets. The situation was aggravated by easier admission into its ranks and allowed parallel membership in other parties. The most active members of the party carried out agitation and propaganda work mainly during the election campaigns to the Duma and stopped all activities after the elections.

The “related parties and groups” that joined the “Union” often linked their entry into the party not with carrying out reforms in the spirit of the Octobrist program, but, first of all, with the need to consolidate forces to fight the revolution. For example, the council of the Tula Union “For the Tsar and Order” decided to “join the Union of October 17 on an autonomous basis for a joint struggle against extreme parties.”

The Octobrists themselves during the revolution of 1905-1907. divided all parties into three large groups: left, right and center parties. They placed their party in the center, calling it constitutional-monarchical. The Octobrists counted the Commercial and Industrial Party, the Legal Order Party, the Progressive Economic Party and other related organizations as their allies. They considered the Cadets to be radicals, leftists, the opposition, but did not confuse them with revolutionaries. The Octobrists did not include themselves in the same political camp as the Cadets.

Among the Octobrists, the term “liberalism” was not popular and was rarely used in relation to their party due to its vague and unclear nature. “Liberalism” was associated with Western ideas brought from outside, and the Octobrists emphasized their “rootedness.” Ruling circles interpreted this term as synonymous with unreliability and almost revolutionaryism. The image of the liberal created by Russian literature also played an important role; he was characterized by complacency and softness, disbelief in the “dark people,” fear of revolution and faith in the prudence of the authorities. In their propaganda literature, the Octobrists, as well as the Cadets, emphasized the democracy and constitutionalism of their party. However, the leader of the Octobrists A.I. Guchkov in his speeches sometimes linked Octobrism with liberalism; There were cases when on the ground in 1905-1906. Political organizations close to the Octobrists arose that used the term “liberalism” in their name: in Omsk - the Russian Liberal Union, in Perm - the Constitutional Liberal Party. Both of them joined the Union on October 17. Later, in exile, some Octobrists attributed their party to the moderate-liberal currents of social thought.

2. Activities of the Octobrists until February 1917

The first Russian revolution was the time of both the birth and flourishing of the “Union of October 17th”. During this period, the Octobrist Party functioned as a full-fledged political organization - with a network of local organizations and a certain social base. Later, this base “floated” to the Cadets, and the party itself virtually ceased to exist. In 1907-14. The Octobrist party was consistently moving towards complete collapse, and its activities practically did not go beyond the Duma. At the same time, the Duma faction of Octobrists did not take into account the decisions of the Octobrist Central Committee at all. Its composition was extremely diverse. This explained her endless hesitation and frequent revisions of decisions. Centrifugal currents were strong within the Duma Octobrist faction. Its number was constantly decreasing - from 154 people at the beginning of the Third Duma to 121 at the end and 98 in the Fourth Duma. The Duma tactics of the Octobrists also ended in complete failure. They accepted P. Stolypin’s proposal to create an alliance with the goal of carrying out a government reform program through the Third Duma. As long as Stolypin observed at least the appearance of this agreement, the Octobrists performed the role of the ruling party in the Duma. As a rule, they blocked with the moderate right and rejected the proposals of the Cadets to create a “constitutional center” to carry out reforms.

However, after a series of crises in the Duma’s relations with the government in 1909-11. The Octobrist faction began to cautiously criticize the actions of the government and act in concert with the Cadets and Progressives on a number of issues. In November 1913, at the conference of the “Union of October 17,” Guchkov directly announced that the Octobrists were moving into opposition to the government, which refused to carry out reforms. However, the right wing of the “Union of October 17” and most of its Duma faction did not support Guchkov. As a result, the Octobrist faction in the Duma split into three parts: Zemstvo-Octobrists (65 people), the Union of October 17 itself (22 left-wing Octobrists) and non-partisans (15 most right-wing Octobrists). By 1913-14 The Octobrist party itself completely collapsed, and its local departments ceased all activities. This happened due to the fact that the “Union of October 17” lost the positions it had during the years of the first Russian revolution in the middle class. In fact, the Octobrists sacrificed these positions to please the interests of a narrow layer of large industrialists and landowners in the south of Russia, who did not want radical reforms, but an “amicable” agreement with the autocracy.

In the Octobrist party, unlike the Cadet party, there were few figures of a theoretical bent. Most of the material that has survived to our time is of a journalistic, educational or polemical nature. The attention of the authors of the Octobrists (A.I. Guchkova, V.M. Petrovo-Solovovo, P.S. Chistyakov and others) was focused on issues related to clarifying the position of the party among other political associations, concretizing its political platform and explaining the attitude of the party to the “beginnings” introduced by the October 17 Manifesto.

P.N. Miliukov, paying tribute to the moderate-liberal program of the “Union,” at the same time criticized it, considering the Octobrists “yesterday’s monarchists who became constitutionalists involuntarily,” by “highest command.”

The rapprochement of the Cadets and Octobrists in the Fourth Duma, their cooperation within the framework of the Progressive Bloc, speaks of the consolidation of liberal forces. But this unity was only of a temporary tactical nature, based on rejection of the policies of the supreme power. The main contradictions between the liberal parties have not gone away - they have only faded into the background. This is shown by the history of the Kadet Party after the fall of the autocracy. By that time, the Union of October 17 as an organizational structure had already ceased to exist and, according to the observations of historians, some of the former Octobrists joined the Cadet Party. Later, in exile, Miliukov described this process as follows: “Having appeared during the February revolution in the role not of opposition, but of a supporter of strong power and an opponent of wavering left-wing socialist tactics, the Kadet party attracted more right-wing political figures into its ranks and until then did not belong to her. These so-called “March” Cadets immediately gave the party’s tactics a special, unusual character.” Of course, to date no one has yet proven that the “March” Cadets are former Octobrists, but it would not be too much of a stretch to look for the pre-revolutionary political sympathies of these people in the right-wing liberal sector.

So, the activities of the Octobrists were concentrated in the State Duma. But by 1916, they became disillusioned with Nicholas II’s ability to bring the war to a victorious end and put forward the idea of ​​a palace coup. However, the February Revolution prevented them from implementing it. After the revolution, the Octobrists tried to save the monarchy. Guchkov entered the Provisional Government as Minister of Navy and War, but resigned two months later, disagreeing with its policies. The Octobrists did not accept the October Revolution. Most of the party members fought for the “white idea” on the fields of the Civil War and ended their lives in exile.

Conclusion

The Octobrist Party was created in November 1905. The social base of the party consisted of the intelligentsia, the commercial and industrial bourgeoisie, and landowners. A.F. Guchkov became the leader of the party. The party size was 60-70 thousand people. The party program included the introduction of universal suffrage, an independent court, equalization of all classes, gradual improvement of the situation of workers, and state insurance.

The economic program of the Octobrists was more moderate than that of the Cadets. Considering private property as the basis of the economy, they, unlike the Cadets, stipulated the partial alienation of landowners' land as the most extreme case. The Octobrists proposed to alleviate the severity of the agrarian question in the country by equalizing the rights of peasants with other classes, resettlement policies, and selling state and appanage lands to peasants.

The Union of October 17 is almost the only party in Russia that did not put forward demands for an 8-hour working day and limited the right of workers to hold strikes in industries of national importance.

Many historians regard the Octobrists and parties close to them as conservative liberals. I.V. Narsky disputes this view. According to him, the term “conservative liberalism” itself is too vague and inaccurate for identifying party formations. In Russian conditions, the combination of the concepts of “liberalism” and “conservatism” is an anomaly, since the first concept was synonymous with unreliability and free-thinking, and the second with “reactionary” and inertia. Therefore, based on the ideas of B.N. Chicherin, Narsky proposed replacing the similar terms “conservative liberalism” and “liberal conservatism” with one term - “conservative reformism”, which implies a readiness for careful transformations based on “banal maxims of common sense.” He included the Union of October 17, the Party of Peaceful Renewal, the Party of Legal Order, the Trade and Industrial Party and a number of smaller, local formations among the conservative-reformist associations, closing this direction on the right flank with the All-Russian national union.

The general approach of modern historiography to the problem of party classification is as follows. All political parties of the early 20th century. are divided into conservative, liberal and socialist, which corresponds to the ideological doctrines that guided their political behavior. S.V. Tyutyukin notes that this division indirectly reflects the attitude of the parties to royal power: support, constructive opposition, complete denial. There is still no unity among historians in their assessment of the Union of October 17, although the majority considers them right-wing liberals.

This approach does not raise any objections, but another question remains open - whether there was a single liberal political camp from the Cadets to the Octobrists, or whether there were two of them. This problem is usually not analyzed, considering it sufficient to define the Cadets as left liberals and the Octobrists as right. At the same time, it seems to be implied that there were still three political camps, which in principle corresponds to the three main directions of social thought. But this inevitably smoothes out the contradictions between the Cadets and the Octobrists and creates the impression that there are no fundamental differences between them.

List of used literature

1.Avrekh A.Ya., Stolypin and the Third Duma, M., 2000 - 196 p.

.Zuev M.N. History of Russia from ancient times to the end of the 20th century, ed. 4, rev. and additional - M.: Bustard, 2007 - 896 p.

.Isaev I.A. History of state and law of Russia. M.: Yurist, 1996 - 544 p.

.Lenin V.I., Experience of classification of Russian political parties, Complete. collection cit., 5th ed., vol. 14; him, Third Duma, ibid., vol. 16; his, Result, ibid., vol. 20: his, Two Centers, ibid; Union October 17. Main program of the Union October 17 // Lenin V.I. Full collection op.

5.Chermensky E.D., Bourgeoisie and tsarism in the revolution of 1905-1907, 6th ed., M., 2008 - 279 p.

Tutoring

Need help studying a topic?

Our specialists will advise or provide tutoring services on topics that interest you.
Submit your application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.

Party composition: business intelligentsia, commercial, industrial and financial bourgeoisie, large landowners. Headed by Shipov, then replaced by A.G. Kuchkov. The party was founded in early November 1905, taking its name from the constitutional Manifesto of October 17, 1905. The Octobrists advocated the preservation of the unity and indivisibility of the Russian Empire, a constitutional monarchy with bicameral representation, and political freedom within the framework of the October 17 Manifesto. The Octobrists proposed solving the agrarian question mainly by equalizing peasants in civil and property rights with other classes, regulating small land leases, promoting the resettlement and resettlement of peasants, facilitating their exit from the community, recognizing state and appanage lands as a fund for allocating peasants, etc. The program provided for the transformation and expansion of local and city government throughout Russia. The work issue in the program was not clearly defined.

20. Tsarism during the First World War. Crisis at the top. Fall of the monarchy.

August 1, 1914 Germany declared war on Russia. 38 (imperialist) states were involved, 1.5 billion people. Purchasing power - 50 million rubles. every day of the war dropped to 27 kopecks.

Not allowing liberals to power, tsarism agreed to cooperate with them in the economic sphere: 1) the activities of zemstvo and city unions were allowed; 2) military-industrial committees were created; 3) special meetings were created to strengthen the supply of the army; 4) 4 special meetings for defense, food and fuel transportation.

Crisis at the top: 1) military defeats; 2) frequent changes of ministers; 3) rasputinism.

The First World War exacerbated all problems and accelerated the revolution. The Duma expresses no confidence in the government; it was supported by the State Council. The government(ministers) found themselves isolated. The autocracy approached its collapse without even realizing the depth of the crisis that gripped the country. February 1917 turned out to be the last month in the history of the Nicholas Monarchy.

4-6. Soviet society in the 60-90s, features of the country’s economic development, problems of power.

Soc.-econ. problems of development of Russia in the 19th-20th centuries. In Russia, due to the catching-up type of development, at the same time. required was to resolve the issues initially. capital accumulation, industrialization and developed monopoly capitalism. All this aggravated the economy. position, created impression of a hopeless situation. Moreover, it was not for nothing that the Russian bourgeoisie remained in the state for a long time. dependence on tsarism. This is made. it is the inability to defend its interests and establish its dictatorship. This will be seen in the eyes of the people. about the depravity of the path of bourgeois development as such, made obvious the conclusions of the theory of Marxism about the need to overthrow the power of the bourgeoisie and build a new, socialist society.

Lack of dialogue m/u bourgeois. intelligentsia and the people led to the fact that the struggle of monologues within society transformed. into the struggle of monologues of parties and authorities. The provisional government, headed by Lvov, put forward the slogans: “War to a victorious end”, “Peace and harmony in the rear”, “Freedom and order”, “Implementation of reforms after the end of the war and the convocation of the Institution. meetings." But the soldiers demanded immediate peace. The peasants launched a massive seizure of land. lands. They sown up to 20% of the fields on the estates of landowners. The workers arbitrarily introduced an 8-hour working day and constantly demanded an increase in wages, because... conditions of growing inflation (400% in six months), money constantly depreciated. As a result, economic The situation in the country deteriorated, the mood of society acquired an extremist character.

In overcoming difficulties, the Provisional Government relied on the initiative of the localities. But the local Soviets, refusing to recognize the power of officials sent from the center, at the same time, as before, saw the central government as a distributor of funds from the poor treasury. The bourgeois ideal. entrepreneurship collided with tradition. the ideal of “fair distribution” of the state. income. But without waiting for the money, realizing the powerlessness of Time. right, the Soviets began to declare their independence from the center. authorities. This undermined the state. unity of Russia. Own nezav. republics were proclaimed not only in Finland, Latvia, Estonia, Belarus, the Caucasus, but also in other regions - among the Cossacks, in Yekaterinburg, Tsaritsyn, Krasnoyarsk, Yeniseisk, and even in the Petrograd and Shlisselburg districts of the Petrograd province.

Power Temp. rights weakened from time to time. Repeated changes in the composition of the cabinet of ministers did not solve the problem. Government crises became increasingly protracted and deep. It soon became clear that such a leader, a cat, could lead the people. will demand an end to the war, the liquidation of the bourgeoisie. state and private property: transfer of factories to workers, and land to peasants. They were only willing to do this to a small extent. by number of left groups: Bolshevik parties, left Socialist Revolutionaries and anarchists. Naib. Act. of these were the Bolsheviks led by Lenin.

In 1905-1917 the Bolsheviks showed political flexibility. They went to take up the cross. slogan of confiscation of all premises. land and its nationalization. In 1917, they borrowed the slogans of the Social Revolutionaries, in particular about the transfer of land to the cross. communities, and factories - workers. This was a direct reliance on the forces of traditionalism, the slogans of the “peasant war”. Putting forward such demands, the Bolsheviks, having given up the initiative during the February Revolution. and ceded influence in the Soviets to right-wing socialists, by the summer of 1917 they became one of the main. watered forces of the country. The name of Lenin was associated with hopes for complete justice for the people. power and the end of the war. In the eyes of the people, he became a leader with miraculous, all-conquering power, the heir of Razin and Pugachev. At the very beginning of September, re-elections of the Petrograd Soviet take place. The Bolsheviks have a majority in it. And Trotsky is elected chairman.

The absolute majority of representatives of the commercial and industrial bourgeoisie stood in purely loyal positions and shied away from political activity. The year 1905 was a turning point in this regard. However, even at that time the Russian bourgeoisie was not particularly radical. The revolution sharply accelerated the organizational formation of liberal forces and their internal division.

The Octobrist Party stood on the right flank of the liberal-monarchist camp.

The creation of the Octobrist party coincided with the period of the highest rise of the revolution. Its predecessor was the “Union of Zemstvo Constitutionalists”, which arose back in 1903. Organizationally, the “Union of October 17” took shape in November-November 1905. A program and charter were developed, and governing bodies were created. But the bulk of Octobrist organizations (260) arose during the election campaign to the First State Duma, in January - April 1906.

The first congress of the “Union of October 17” was held in February 1906. Moscow and St. Petersburg committees were created. The Moscow committee was headed by the actual privy councilor and chamber cadet of the imperial court D.N. Shipov. The head of the St. Petersburg committee was Baron P.L. Corf.

At the end of October 1906, Alexander Ivanovich Guchkov was elected chairman of the general Central Committee. In fact, he, together with Shipov, is the founder of the “Union of October 17”, when at the November Zemstvo Congress of 1905 he broke with the liberals - the Cadets and their leader P.N. Miliukov.

A.I. Guchkov is a bright, passionate, impetuous, addicted figure. A man whose word and deed, idea and its implementation always went hand in hand. These personality traits of Guchkov helped him live and achieve his goals, but at the same time complicated his relationships with political allies and friends.

He was one of the few Russian bourgeois figures who considered it his duty to try a compromise with the historical authorities in order to save the country. Guchkov in 1905-1917. possessed in itself, perhaps, no less influence than the entire Octobrist party. His great-grandfather was a serf peasant who freed himself and his family and founded his own weaving enterprise. He was the son of a Moscow merchant - an Old Believer; he himself was a large homeowner and industrialist, director of a Moscow accounting bank, and a member of the board of the Novoye Vremya newspaper company.

A.I. Guchkov graduated from the Faculty of History and Philology of Moscow University. While still a very young man, he made a risky trip to Tibet and visited the Dalai Lama. He served in Transbaikalia, in the border guard, and fought a duel. During the Boer War, Guchkov is in southern Africa, where he fights on the side of the Boers. In 1903, Guchkov was in Macedonia, where an uprising broke out against the Turks.

During the Russo-Japanese War, he equipped an ambulance train and went to Far East as a representative of the Red Cross, he is captured by the Japanese at Mukden. After his liberation, he returned to Moscow, when the country was approaching the highest point of the revolutionary movement.

A.I. Guchkov had a reputation as an energetic man, not afraid of responsibility to public opinion. For example, he took under his protection such an unpopular measure as the introduction of military courts. This caused persecution in the liberal press, and Shipov then announced his resignation from the Octobrist party. By the way, because of this support, Guchkov was not elected to the First State Duma.

Guchkov contributed to the pacification of Russia after the first revolution. But he also contributed to the gradual establishment of political stability in the country, which contributed to industrial and economic growth. The modest human rights that became part of Russian reality after the first revolution were respected.

He was a man of principle. He had a personal friendship with P.A. Stolypin. As Chairman of the State Duma since 1910, Guchkov provided the Stolypin government with a stable majority in the State Duma. But in 1911, Stolypin resorted to an artificial break in the work of legislative institutions in order to implement, as an emergency government legislation, the law on zemstvos in the western provinces, which had been defeated in the State Council.

Then Guchkov refused the post of Chairman of the Duma as a sign of protest, withdrew from political activity for a while and left for the Far East. However, he considered it necessary to attend Stolypin’s funeral, and on the first anniversary of his murder he came to Kyiv to honor his memory.

Guchkov was the first to expose the scandalous role of Grigory Rasputin at the royal court, and spoke about it from the rostrum of the State Duma. These earned the hatred of the imperial couple. At the behest of the government, Guchkov, through a series of machinations, was not admitted to the Fourth State Duma.

The summer crisis of 1915 again brought Guchkov to the forefront of the political struggle. In July of this year, he became chairman of the Central Military-Industrial Committee, then, despite pressure from the royal family, he was elected as a member of the State Council. In the fall of 1916, Guchkov became the central figure of the group planning a military coup. But the coup was too late.

The revolution of February 23 - March 1, 1917 overthrows the tsarist regime. It is Guchkov, together with Shulgin, who volunteers to go to Pskov to the Tsar in order to snatch the act of abdication from Nicholas II.

In the first composition of the Provisional Government, Guchkov received the post of Minister of War and Navy. After the April demonstration, he proposes to fight the Petrograd Soviet by armed means, but most ministers refuse this. Guchkov resigns. And then he is already on the side of the opponents of the developing revolution, supports Kornilov’s speech, then fights the Soviet regime, emigrates. In exile, Guchkov continued to be actively involved in political activities. In 1935, he was diagnosed with intestinal cancer, he underwent a major operation, believed in recovery, but died in 1936.

So, on October 10, 1906, the “Union of October 17” was officially registered by the authorities, i.e. recognized as a legally operating organization.

According to the Charter, both individuals and entire parties and organizations could join it, recognizing the need to transform the political system of Russia on the basis of the Manifesto of October 17, 1917. Membership in the “Union of October 17,” unlike most other parties that were “to the right” and “to the left” of him was not associated with persecution by the authorities.

A.I. Guchkov said: “The core of the Octobrists, who laid the foundation for the Union of October 17 in November 1905, was formed from that minority of all-zem congresses that adhered to the general demands of broad liberal reforms in all areas of our life and the transition from outdated forms of unlimited autocracy to a constitutional system , but at the same time fought against the hobbies of unbridled radicalism and against socialist experiments that threatened the country with severe political and social upheavals.”

The parties that joined the “Union” retained their autonomy, i.e. had their own program, central bodies, press, local organizations. This gave the Union of October 17 a certain political amorphousness. A number of organizations adjacent to it actually allied themselves with the right-wing Black Hundreds, with the forces uniting against the revolution. On the other hand, the left wing of the Soyuz was close to the cadets.

In 1905-1907 220 departments of the Union were created. During the period of preparation and conduct of elections to the First State Duma, Octobrist organizations functioned in 63 provinces of the country, the majority in the European part of Russia.

The number of members of the “Union of October 17” was approximately 75-77 thousand people. The social basis of the Octobrist party was the large commercial, industrial and financial bourgeoisie, bourgeois landowners, and the bourgeois intelligentsia. There were quite a lot of highly paid commercial and industrial employees, officials of various ranks, and retired military personnel. The party also included the middle urban strata and the intelligentsia.

In St. Petersburg, Yekaterinoslav and Sormovo, even “workers’ parties of October 17” were formed. Some business owners recruited their own workers into the party. There is information about the creation of Octobrist peasant organizations in the Voronezh, Tavrichesky, Moscow, Tula, Kostroma, Yaroslavl and Tomsk provinces and the Don region.

However, over 93% of the entire leadership of the party were industrialists, bankers, merchants, homeowners, landowners, and highly paid intelligentsia. The Octobrists did not have mass support among the working people.

The Octobrist program largely coincided with Stolypin’s government course and expressed the interests of those who were interested in carrying out moderate reforms within the framework of the program outlined in the “October 17 Manifesto.” The program had a pronounced conservative-liberal character. Guchkov said that it is easy for radical or socialist elements in the fight against the existing system, because they storm it entirely. And the Octobrists have to fight for the monarchy and against the monarch, for the army and against its military leaders, for the church and against the hierarchs.

The ideal of the Octobrists was the union of the autocracy and the bourgeoisie. They defended the principle of hereditary constitutional monarchy. The Union program explained the need to preserve the monarchy: “The former unlimited autocrat becomes a constitutional monarch, but in the new conditions of the state system he receives new power and a new high task of being the supreme leader of a free people.

Rising above countless private and local interests, above the unilateral goals of various classes, estates, nationalities, parties, the monarchy, precisely under current conditions, is called upon to fulfill its purpose - to be a pacifying principle in that sharp struggle, the political, national struggle. - social and social, for which wide scope is now opening up with the proclamation of political and civil freedom. Only through the unity of the monarch with the people can that strong, self-confident government power be created that will be able to return peace to us!”

But how then can we explain Guchkov’s actions aimed at the abdication of Nicholas II from the throne? The fact is that Guchkov was aware that the pacification of the revolutionary element was possible only on the condition that the one who was the main responsible person, i.e. the sovereign had to leave. But at the same time, the question of the regime was not raised. It was supposed to remain monarchical. Nicholas II had to make a sacrifice for the good of the Fatherland. He had to abdicate the throne in favor of his son. And the personality of the little heir should have disarmed everyone. In Russia, disgust and alienation were created not in relation to the monarchy and the regime, but towards those individuals who were the embodiment of this regime at that time.

If Alexei had become sovereign (even with a regent), this could have saved the situation. He would be not only a symbol, but a living force, to fight for which a lot of people could be found who would die for a king, even a small one. Subsequently, Guchkov said: “I was so convinced of this means of saving Russia, the dynasty, that I was ready to calmly put fate on the line and, if I said that I was a monarchist and will remain a monarchist and will die a monarchist, then I must say “that never in all the time of my political activity have I had the consciousness that I was taking a step so necessary for the monarchy, as at that moment when I wanted to improve the health of the monarchy.”

Recognizing autocracy as the only possible form of government in Russia, the Octobrists considered it possible and desirable to create a legislative Duma under the tsar, but nothing more.

However, Guchkov himself was very skeptical about the possibility of creating a public or parliamentary cabinet in Russia. He was very careful about bringing elements of the public to the top, and even more so about creating a purely public cabinet, since all these people, especially those associated with parties, were bound by promises, personal connections, etc.

It seemed to Guchkov that the feeling of contempt and disgust, the feeling of malice that was growing more and more towards the supreme power, all this would be completely washed away, destroyed by the fact that a boy would appear as the bearer of the supreme power, in relation to whom it was impossible to say bad.

Among the issues that, in the opinion of the Octobrists, the State Duma should set itself for development and gradual resolution were: the peasant question, the labor question, the development and strengthening of the principles of local self-government, concerns about public education, judicial and administrative reforms, economic and financial measures.

First of all, in their program the Octobrists spoke out for preserving the unity and indivisibility of the Russian state. They were opponents of national autonomy, with the exception of Finland. They granted her the right to a certain autonomous state structure, subject to maintaining state ties with the empire. At the same time, the Octobrists recognized the broadest right of individual nationalities to satisfy and protect their cultural needs, within the limits permitted by the idea of ​​statehood and the interests of other nationalities.

This is how Guchkov expressed his attitude to the Jewish question to Nicholas II: “I am not a hunter of Jews, it would be better if we didn’t have them, but we have them given by history... We must create normal conditions, no matter how we treat them, but I must say that all events with Jewish dominance are no good. There are qualification restrictions in schools - this, it would seem, should have protected us from Jewish dominance in the spiritual field, but in fact, look: in the field of printing - the Jews are omnipotent there; artistic and theatrical criticism is in the hands of Jews. All this gives nothing, meanwhile there is no end to the bitterness.

It is necessary to remove the Pale of Settlement... Only in one respect do I agree to maintain restrictions in relation to Jewry - not to allow Jews into the officer ranks (but they don’t want to) and to limit their right to acquire land outside the cities (they are not attracted to the role of landowners )...".

Guchkov believed that in this way it was possible to avoid opposition in those circles that were anti-Semitic; by maintaining these restrictions, Jewish reforms could be carried out without upheaval.

The Octobrist program defined the generally accepted range of civil rights: freedom of religion, freedom of speech, assembly, unions, movement, choice of place of residence and occupation, freedom of labor, industry, trade, its disposal, inviolability of the person, home, correspondence, property of citizens. Judicial liability of officials, whatever their position.

In the agrarian question, landownership was preserved. The program provided for the right of the peasant to increase land ownership and the possibility of capitalist development in the countryside, but while preserving the interests of large landowners - landowners, rebuilding their economy in a capitalist way.

Regarding workers, in addition to the requirements for insurance, provision for workers and their families in case of illness, disability and death, restrictions on working time for women and children and in industries that are particularly harmful to health, freedom of trade unions and freedom of strikes were recognized. But at the same time, there is a need to legislatively regulate the conditions of this economic struggle. We were talking about industries, enterprises, institutions, “on which the life and health of the population, important public and state interests, state security, and defense interests depend.”

The Octobrists believed that public education should be placed at the forefront in the activities of the Duma. The program advocated universal primary education, an increase in the number of secondary and higher educational institutions, and the need for the widest allocations for education. In addition, simplifying and bringing training programs closer to the needs of life. The Octobrists believed that broad freedom of private and public initiative was needed in the opening and maintenance of educational institutions.

The Octobrists considered participation in renewed self-government to be the best school of political freedom for the people.

Judicial and administrative reforms assumed a classless, independent court, expansion of the competence of the jury, strict criminal and civil liability for violations by the authorities of laws and the rights of individuals.

Economic and financial measures assumed a rational and fair tax system.

The Octobrists took part in elections to all four State Dumas, but did not have a majority in any of them. Only in the Third Duma is the Octobrist party the strongest party (a little more than a third of the seats), but this is still not the majority of the seats. Therefore, in the State Duma, the Octobrists were blocs alternately with the Cadets and monarchists.

In the III Duma A.I. Guchkov was the chairman of the state defense commission and actively advocated for the reorganization of the army and for improving the financial situation of officers. Guchkov considered the main task of his activities in the Duma to be the revival of Russia's military power. Speaking in the Duma against the dominance and incompetent management of the great princes in the naval and military departments, and the impossibility of introducing new ideas there because of this, Guchkov aroused the indignation of Nicholas II. However, in this way he contributed to the reorganization of the management of the military department.

Back in 1913, Guchkov caught the first signs of a new revolution and predicted the imminent death of the tsarist system. He called on representatives of moderate political circles of Russian society to go into opposition to the government and royal family so that by the time of the inevitable fall of Nicholas II, control of the formation of a new government would not be lost. “The historical drama that we are experiencing,” said A.I. Guchkov, is that we are forced to defend the monarchy against the monarch, the church against church hierarchy, the army against its leaders, the authority of government power - against the bearers of this power."

As we have already said, after the February Revolution, the Octobrists (Guchkov) entered the Provisional Government. Trying to seize the initiative, A.I. Guchkov signed an order according to which the concept of “lower rank” was abolished and replaced with “soldier”. When addressing soldiers, it was required to say “You,” the titles of officers were abolished, and the formula for addressing “Mr.” (colonel, general, etc.) was introduced.

The military was allowed to participate in unions and societies formed for political purposes. In March 1917, on Guchkov’s initiative or with his consent, class and religious restrictions on admission to military educational institutions were abolished. In technical artillery establishments, an 8-hour working day was introduced with the establishment of factory committees elected from workers on the basis of universal, equal, direct and secret suffrage.

The ranks of adjutant general and wing adjutant, etc. were abolished. Guchkov worked to rejuvenate the senior command staff. Many generals then discussed the question of joining the Socialist Revolutionary Party. “Such a readiness to capitulate to the Soviet, even on the part of senior military men who had made a career under the tsar,” Guchkov later wrote, “paralyzed any possibility of a struggle to strengthen the power of the Provisional Government.”

At the end of April 1917, Guchkov officially announced his desire to resign. In response to harsh remarks from his colleagues, he replied that government officials were steering the ship while being tied hand and foot. Under such conditions, the ship will inevitably sink. “It is impossible to govern the state on the basis of an incessant rally... But we not only overthrew the holders of power, we overthrew and abolished the very idea of ​​power, destroyed those necessary foundations on which all power is built.”

After the October Revolution, the Octobrists actively participated in the Civil War, were part of the White Guard governments and were forced to emigrate.

On February 8 (21), 1906, the First All-Russian Congress of the “Union of October 17” party opened in Moscow. At the congress, which was held until February 12 (25), the final design of the structure and organization of the Octobrist Party was completed.

The Union of October 17 party arose in 1905 after the publicationManifesto of October 17 (30) “On improving public order” , which granted Russian citizens political rights and freedoms. Among the founders and members of the “Union of October 17” were prominent zemstvo figures (Count P. A. Heyden, M. A. Stakhovich, Prince N. S. Volkonsky), capital professors, lawyers, scientists and cultural figures (L. N. Benois, V. I. Gerye, F. N. Plevako, V. I. Sergeevich), publishers and journalists (N. N. Pertsov, A. A. Stolypin, B. A. Suvorin), representatives of the commercial and industrial world and banking circles (N. S. Avdakov, E. L. Nobel, Ryabushinsky brothers). The party was headed by a large Moscow homeowner and industrialist A. I. Guchkov.

By the spring of 1906, there were 260 departments of the Union of October 17 party operating in the country, most of them arose in the provinces of European Russia with relatively developed noble land ownership; on the national outskirts of the empire the number of Octobrist organizations was small. In Moscow and St. Petersburg there were branches of the Central Committee of the Party, as well as city councils, which directed the activities of district party organizations. The party's printed organs were the newspapers "Voice of Moscow", "Slovo" and others. In 1906, the Octobrists published up to 50 newspapers in Russian, German and Latvian.

The Octobrist Party represented and defended the interests of landowners. They defended “strong monarchical power,” considering all its actions aimed at suppressing the revolutionary situation in the country as natural. In their program, the Octobrists supported the policy of the Russian government, advocating the preservation of the unity and indivisibility of the Russian Empire, a constitutional monarchy in which the emperor, as the bearer of supreme power, was to be limited by the decrees of the “Fundamental Laws.” Civil rights in the Octobrist program included freedom of conscience and religion, inviolability of person and home, freedom of speech, assembly, unions, and movement.

The “Union of October 17” proposed to solve the agrarian question by equalizing peasants in civil and property rights with other classes, promoting the resettlement and resettlement of peasants, facilitating their exit from the community, recognizing state and appanage lands as a fund for allocating them to peasants, as well as facilitating the purchase of land by peasants from private owners through the Peasant Bank. The Octobrists actively supportedagrarian reform of P. A. Stolypin .

Members of the "Union" recognized the freedom of workers' organizations, unions, meetings and the right of workers to strike based on economic, professional and cultural needs. They were supporters of expanding public education and declared the need for judicial and administrative reform. The Octobrists advocated limiting the length of the working day, introducing insurance for workers, and also demanded a reduction in taxation of the population.

In November 1913, at the conference of the Union of October 17, the course of the Russian government was sharply criticized. The subject of particular concern for the leaders of the “Union” was the increase in crisis phenomena in the political life of the country. Already in December 1913, the Duma faction of the Octobrists split into three parts. The First World War led to the final disorganization of the Union.

In July 1915, the publication of the newspaper “Voice of Moscow” was stopped, and soon the activities of the party itself were stopped. However, until the summer of 1917, some major figures of the “Union of October 17” (A. I. Guchkov, M. V. Rodzianko, I. V. Godnev) continued to play a prominent role in the political life of Russia.