However people might carp and cavil at a piece of legislation which was
distasteful to them, there can be no doubt that there was joy in the poor
hovels of Poland. Still there were many shoals ahead needing a skilful
pilot. It was easy enough to decree the broad principle of the ukase,
but the working out of the details was quite another matter. Neither
the Emperor nor his ministers had the power of creating light out of
darkness. There were many difficulties to be mastered, many riddles to be
solved, taxing the acutest ingenuity of the Russian statesmen. Three of
the chief of the puzzles were the right of succession, the power of the
peasant to sell his land, and the eternal labour question.
As regarded the right of succession, the Government professed to attach
great importance to the principle of large peasant holdings, but inasmuch
as Poland was under the law of the Code Napoléon, it was obvious that at
the death of a man with a family his property must be divided, and by
degrees the holdings must become infinitesimally small. Crux No. 2.—If
the peasant were allowed to sell or mortgage his land, the Jew usurer
would soon be the owner of half Poland. Crux No. 3.—Where was labour to
be found for the land left in the hands of the proprietors—as I have said
before, the richest portion of the cultivated area? The freed peasant
would have his hands full with the management of his own holding, and the
class who formerly cultivated no land on their own account, and therefore
did not come under the scope of the new law, would not suffice to till
the domains of the nobles. Each of these three puzzles itself bristled
with minor perplexities and embarrassments enough to break the heads of
General Miliutin and his crew of experts.
A compensation at the rate of sixteen and two-thirds years’ purchase may
seem to us very inadequate. But the conditions of land in Poland were not
what they are in France or in England. It is needful to remember the vast
tracts of land lying far away from all communication, the scarcity of
labour, the difficulty of transport, the expense of exporting produce and
importing agricultural implements and other necessaries, and then it will
be plain that the value of land in Russia and in Poland did not stand in
the same relation to money as it did in England, France or Belgium. I
feel sure that, having regard to all the circumstances of the case, the
ukase was an honest attempt to benefit the peasant on the one hand, and
fairly to recoup the landed proprietor on the other.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account