The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1858-08-09

unAaV sffIQ uat nm
me aw sars the dsnniGvs Judgement or The examine,
tim al hich in the instance reserved 10 the rural
spmmunes are Of the jurisdiction Of the Judge Of
Psrss nay appeal from the decision of The Judge Of
Pesce TO Inc district tribunal -thn the term OF month
frcu The publication OF the judgment
The Tribunal Of District having it, seat In the chief town
Of chtrcis composed Of chief Of district and two
sssistsDts Of whom one elected BY the nobility soo the
otner by peasants The election Of this after taxes
psce in the chief place OF the district by speca depa les
nominated sccorang TO article 47e 4el OF the ttird vo
pve candidates. amongst whom the Governor OF the pro-
chooses the assessor who may belong TO any css
Of the popuIasiou whatever
nation Of civil criminal affairs belonging to the orsdic
tkD Of the ordinary tribunals shs de de only ne d,sren
which vii; have been caused oy TOE &qp
cson Of the regulations for the aneorsson @, tho con-
don of the PEASANTS, and wh,h will already have been
judged in the nrst instance oy the Juage o: peace
prohibited 10 lodge drectys compliant pefore the VII
bUna
The Judgment Of last instance OF lsw suits between
de- and peasants Is reserved 70 tie government
tbs tribunal, composed under the presidency Of the
the Civil Governor Marshal OF the mobility OF the
eoveynpent the President the Cns OF irusins,
CT the Attorney Of the government JUDGES Only 'wo
Process bers een pessart and landlor, con ,erpog
right property not under the value OF s"o hundred
silver rcub!es
q Preaess between landlord aud q rura community,
cor Ger Ming n r'ebt Of property or Of fruon o! lands,
Buildings OF other places valued 81 ess st ons Thousand
Il il prohbi,ed 10 directly lodge compant before the
tribunal The government. which ad yes court
OF appeal It is prohibited to oogs directly an appeal
dc csop Of the district tribunal confirming the
decision OF the Judge OF Peace
Such are the two projects of the special commits
sion ofthe Central Committee of Emancipation which,
should they be carried into execution, are destined
to settle the great and grave question OF the reor
ganzation and administration OF our country commu'
mites; that is to say, of the whole country.
As the regulation of the rural communes is, with
out any doubt, the most important, shal! ask your
permission stop here little and to offer in few
words some observations on its intrinsic va!ue-ob
servations which, can assure you, are mace by all
those who, like myself, have been able to examine
these documents
therefore shall not hesitate to declare, first and
foremost that these regulations not applicable,
and here are my reasons:-
In these latter times the rural commune in Rus
STA has been much spoken OF; our press attaching
with good reasons great importance 10 this nation
al institution set forth all its value and utility. Now
If the commune was useful at epoch when II was
under the absolute domination of The landlord how
much more important will it become when IL Will be
composed of members personally free and when it
will have to take care of other interests than those
of its former landlord. Did the authors Of this new
regulation sufficiently impress themselves with the
value OF these communes, whose great aud enormous
importance for Russia the Emperor Nicholas himself
so well recognized that in his idea it was TO form the
basis of the new judicial organization of Russia
Did they recognize to it the rights, without which II
is impossible Tor it to exist, as social body! DO
saTy Tor il to be useful to its members and to the
country!
Sincerely nobody will say SO after having carefully
examined the project.
According to the latter, the commune remains
what it has been up to this day, since IL does not
get out OF the dependence of the landlord. The
landlord is chief OF the commune; he may az the
same time be chief of canton; nothing Is done with
out his authorization; the commune mas not even
the right of dsposing of its capitals as II peases
The landlord. who in no manner contributes to the
Formation of those capitals, who Oftentmes is very
little competent in affairs is nevertheless called upon
To direct the employment of those capitals If pea
SAINT wants TO leave the commune the consent OF this
latter is not sufficient he wants still more that OF the
landlord To what purpose? we ask. Is 1t in case
the peasant who asks for permi sion OF emigrating
should not hrve entirely acquitted himself Of his
burthens To the profit of the landlord? But did the
authors Of the project forget that from the moment
they admit the existence OF the commune conformity
responsible, tn eemigration OF one OF ITS members
cannot cause any prejudice to the landlord the COM
mune being responsible for him? Now, If the COM
mune permits him to emgrate, has the landlord the
right of opposing it? Evidently not; he ought to
have to deal only with the commune, and then IL IT
not evident that this il equal to allowing arbitrari-
ness free scope to exercise itself whenever the per-
sonal interest Of the landlord will he at stake, which
will happen almost always
The ancient OF the Commune (Starosta) Is con-
firmed by the landlord Consequently the landlord
win have the right to prevent the nomination
of Starosta who might well take care Of the inte-
peasants,
reason might not please him. Besides, by obstnately
refusing his confirmation to such or such individual
the landlord easily cause to be elected him who
il the convenient to him. or rather him who Will
be the most devoted TO him. This is another great ati
tude left 10 caprice and arbitrsrDess; but will not
insist, for have something much more important
to point out.
Doubtless, nobody would have believed that the
landlord of today should even, after the emancipa-
ton, preserve the right 10 nfict punishments, viz
even corporal punishments on the peasants Of his
own authority, without giving the commune notice
Of il; de not say even without consulting ~ IL IL
possible that an individual, whoever he may be,
shall be authorized TO infct without inquest with
out Judgment, corporal punishment on man re
cognized by the law as free, and that nothing,
misdemeanor which often will not be one, since the
very vague definition Of the project viz insoenoe dis
order Drunkenness and Others similar, leaves To the
landlord or to say rather "a arbitrarness, oil latitude
may draw on the peasant chastsement az grave,
nay. punishment 40 ignominious for him who un.
dergoes H. so discreditable and degrading for the
landlord who orders IL, and for the law that auto-
rizes it in word, punishment which II was pre-
cisely the noble intention of the Emperor Alexander
TO remove from both the general custom and the
The project does not even admit of any exception
either OF age or sex.
And the punishment of imprisonment for three
days equally left 20 the good pleasure OF the land
lord But a bad landlord-and who would dare to
affirm that there none in Russia might profit
OF this right 80 as TO cause to he regretted the
good old times when the peasant belonged to him,
soul and body A regulation, law, must above
all, have an eye 20 preventing abuses. Now, these
abuses always are coming from the bad, aud
not from the good citizens the law must,
therefore, have In view the bad citizens. Did
the authors Of this project take well into account
what Is to the peasant to be three days in prison
in harvest time-three fine summer days passed
under bolts, when the is 20 be carried home aud
the peasant is every day threatened with losing the
fruit Of his labor Of whole year? And this ruin the
IN
authority without the knowledge of the communel
Certainly this il not the to remove the abuses
Of the old state Of things 1t Vs. the contrary, that
Of aggravating and OF rendering them easy and
numerous
II must not be forgotten that the emancipation is
TO bring about considerable changes in the respec-
tive position Of the landowners and serfs. To-day
the scrfs do not form distinct and independent
social body; the serf is bat the accessory, the de-
pendent the fortune Of the landlord; the land,