Notes

      INTRODUCTION: WHY MAKLAKOV?

1.    A. Lunacharskii, K. Radek, and L. Trotskii, Siluety: Politicheskie portrety [Silhouettes: Political portraits] (Moscow: Izdatelstvo politicheskoi literatury, 1991), 240. Trotsky’s comment originally appeared in an article entitled “Guchkov and Guchkovshchina” [Guchkov and the Guchkov Era], in the newspaper Kievskaia mysl, no. 276 (October 6, 1913).

2.    See, for example, P. N. Miliukov, “Sud nad Kadetskim ‘Liberalizmom,’” Sovremennye Zapiski 41 (1930): 347, 365, 368.

3.    Quoted in Michael Karpovich, “Two Types of Russian Liberalism: Maklakov and Miliukov,” in Continuity and Change in Russian and Soviet Thought, ed. Ernest J. Simmons, Joint Committee on Slavic Studies of the American Council of Learned Societies and the Social Science Research Council (New York: Russell and Russell, 1955, 1967), 129, 138 (citing Miliukov’s remarks at Kadet party congress of October 12–18, 1905).

4.    V. V. Shelokhaev, “Agrarnia programma kadetov v pervoi Russkoi revoliutsii” [Agricultural program of the Kadets in the first Russian revolution], Istoricheskie Zapiski 86 (1970), 172, 183, 192, 204–7. Peasant issues are discussed in various places, but especially in chapter 12.

5.    V. A. Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii (New York: Chekhov Publishing House [Izdatelstvo imeni Chekhova], 1954), 146–48; see also I. P. Aleksinskii, “Pervye gody moego studentchestva (1889–1891),” in Moskovskii universitet, 1755–1930 (Paris: Izdatelstvo “Sovremmenie Zapiski,” 1930), 355, 363–65. S. V. Zavadskii, “Iz Zhizni Moskovskogo Universiteta v XIX stoletii,” in Moskovskii universitet, 1755–1930 (Paris: Izdatelstvo “Sovremmenie Zapiski,” 1930), 351–52, acknowledges Maklakov’s eloquence but reports the student vote as coming out the other way.

6.    Compare a recent argument that abolitionist zeal, particularly in opposing Lincoln’s consideration of proposals to buy out the South’s slaveholders, had the effect of drastically prolonging the Civil War, with its terrible loss of life and long-run setback for healthy political evolution in the South. Thomas Fleming, A Disease in the Public Mind (New York: Da Capo, 2013).

7.    N. I. Dedkov, Konservativnyi liberalizm Vasiliia Maklakova (Moscow: AIRO-XX, 2005), 64–65.

8.    I. I. Tolstoi, Dnevnik, 1906–1916 [Diary, 1906–16] (St. Petersburg: Evropeiskii Dom, 1997), 469–70.

9.    He was named acting minister on December 16, 1912; confirmed as minister on February 21, 1913; and relieved of the office on June 5, 1915.

10.  Boris Efimov, Desiat desiatiletii: O tom, chto videl, perezhil, zapomnil [Ten decades: What I saw, survived, remembered] (Moscow: Vagrius, 2000), 204.

11.  Bolshaia Sovetskaia Entsiklopediia (Moscow: 1926–47), 37:752.

12.  Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 78.

13.  Matthew Stephenson, “‘When the Devil Turns . . .’: The Political Foundations of Independent Judicial Review,” Journal of Legal Studies 32 (2003), 59.

14.  See chapter 12, discussing the June 1916 legislation and the disconnect between peasant life and the country’s general laws.

15.  See chapter 9.

16.  Dominic Lieven, Nicholas II: Twilight of the Empire (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1993), see page 106 for the Pobedonostsev quotation.

17.  Ibid.

18.  Stephen F. Williams, Liberal Reform in an Illiberal Regime: The Creation of Private Property in Russia, 1906–1915 (Stanford: Hoover Institution Press, 2006), 97.

19.  For the absence of peasant rights, see Victor Leontovitsch, The History of Liberalism in Russia, trans. Parmen Leontovitsch, with a foreword by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 2012). For peasant sayings about the law, see Boris Nikolayevich Mironov, with Ben Eklof, A Social History of Imperial Russia, 1700–1917 (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1999–2000), 304–5.

20.  Richard Wortman, “Property Rights, Populism, and the Russian Political Culture,” in Civil Rights in Imperial Russia, ed. Olga Crisp and Linda Edmondson (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989), 13–32.

21.  Bakhmetev-Maklakov Correspondence, 1:460 (Maklakov to Bakhmetev, August 30, 1921); ibid., 3:475 (Maklakov to Bakhmetev, April 1, 1930); Lieven, Nicholas II, 176–77.

22.  Fred W. Carstensen and Gregory Guroff, “Economic Innovation in Imperial Russia and the Soviet Union: Observations,” in Entrepreneurship in Imperial Russia and the Soviet Union, ed. Gregory Guroff and Fred V. Carstensen (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1983), 353.

23.  Thomas C. Owen, Russian Corporate Capitalism from Peter the Great to Perestroika (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995), 187, and generally, 50–84, 115–38 [LR 246]; Thomas C. Owen, Capitalism and Politics in Russia: A Social History of the Moscow Merchants, 1855–1905 (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1981); Thomas C. Owen, “The Russian Industrial Society and Tsarist Economic Policy, 1867–1905,” Journal of Economic History 45, no. 3 (September 1985), 599–600.

24.  See Jacob Walkin, “Government Controls over the Press,” Russian Review 13 (1954), 203–9.

25.  V. A. Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost na zakate staroi Rossii (Vospominaniia sovremenika) [State and society in the twilight of old Russia (Recollections of a contemporary)] (Paris: Izdanie zhurnala “Illustrirovanaia Rossiia,” 1936), 149–50, 161–62, 242–43.

26.  Chapter 3 discusses Maklakov’s relations with Tolstoy and includes Maklakov’s analysis of the relation between Tolstoy’s views and his actual conduct as a reforming public figure.

27.  Kathleen Parthé, “Who Speaks the Truth? Writers vs. Lawyers,” Universals and Contrasts, NY-St. Petersburg Institute of Linguistics, Cognition, and Culture, no. 1 (Spring 2012), 1.

28.  Wayne Dowler, Russia in 1913 (DeKalb: Northern Illinois University Press, 2012), 47, 58.

29.  Douglas C. North, John Joseph Wallis, and Barry R. Weingast, Violence and Social Orders: A Conceptual Framework for Interpreting Recorded Human History (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2009); Francis Fukuyama, The Origins of Political Order: From Prehuman Times to the French Revolution (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2011); Daron Acemoglu and James Robinson, Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty (New York: Crown Business, 2012); Joel Mokyr, The Enlightened Economy: An Economic History of Britain, 1700–1850 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2012); Deirdre McCloskey, The Bourgeois Virtues: Ethics for an Age of Commerce (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2006); Deirdre McCloskey, Bourgeois Dignity: Why Economics Can’t Explain the Modern World (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2011); Deirdre McCloskey, Bourgeois Equality: How Ideas, Not Capital or Institutions, Enriched the World (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2016).

      CHAPTER 1: SCAPEGRACE AND SCHOLAR

1.    V. A. Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii (New York: Chekhov Publishing House [Izdatelstvo imeni Chekhova], 1954), 25.

2.    Ibid., 12.

3.    N. G. Dumova, Kadetskaia partiia v period pervoi mirovoi voiny i Fevralskoi revolutsii [The Kadet party in the period of the First World War and the February Revolution] (Moscow: Nauka, 1988), 130. See also William G. Rosenberg, Liberals in the Russian Revolution: The Constitutional Democratic Party, 1917–1921 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1974), 23, saying that Maklakov came from one of “Russia’s oldest families” and speaking of the “drawing rooms” of Maklakov and other Kadet leaders as “frequently the scenes of large social gatherings, in which guests opposing the party’s political orientation often outnumbered Kadets.”

4.    So Maklakov said in his memoirs (see Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 329; see also 22, 280, for Zvenigorod connection). A Russian scholar reports that the Maklakov archives confirms that the Maklakov property was not income generating. N. I. Dedkov, Konservativnyi liberalizm Vasiliia Maklakova (Moscow: AIRO-XX, 2005), 22–23. On the subject of family wealth, Maklakov noted that Aunt Raisa’s eighteen children (his first cousins once removed) all had to work for a living. Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 11–12. Of course, that would not be inconsistent with his mother’s inheriting enough to live on without working, she being an only child.

5.    Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 21–24.

6.    Ibid., 14–17.

7.    Ibid., 27–28.

8.    V. A. Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost na zakate staroi Rossii (Vospominaniia sovremenika) [State and society in the twilight of old Russia (Recollections of a contemporary)] (Paris: Izdanie zhurnala “Illustrirovanaia Rossiia,” 1936), 32–38.

9.    Ibid., 39–41.

10.  Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 28–31, 301.

11.  Ibid., 17–21.

12.  Ibid., 32–41.

13.  Marina Aleksandrovna Ivanova, “Rol V. A. Maklakova v Obshchestvenno-politicheskoi zhizni Rossii” [The role of V. A. Maklakov in the social-political life of Russia] (PhD thesis, Rossiiskii Universitet Druzhby Narodov, 1997), 141, citing GIM, fond 442, ll. 112–112ob.

14.  Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 32–54; Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost, 12–13.

15.  Kornei Chukovsky, Diary, 1901–1969, ed. Victor Erlich, trans. Michael Henry Heim (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2005), 251–52.

16.  Otdel Rukopisei, Rossiiskaia Gosudarstvennaia Biblioteka [Manuscript Department, Russian State Library], fond 131, papka 32, delo 62. November 18, 1892.

17.  Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 122–28.

18.  Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 121–22; Dedkov, Konservativnyi liberalizm, 26.

19.  Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 54–56, 128–30, 136, 188–89; Dedkov, Konservativnyi liberalizm, 32.

20.  V. A. Maklakov, “Vinogradov,” Slavonic and East European Review 13, no. 39 (1939), 633–40; Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 194, describing Vinogradov as a “European in the best sense of the word.”

21.  Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 192, 211–13.

22.  Ibid., 62–64; Dedkov, Konservativnyi liberalizm, 34.

23.  Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 63–67; Dedkov, Konservativnyi liberalizm, 34–35.

24.  GDSO, Third Duma, 5th Sess., pt. 2, February 29, 1912, col. 3400.

25.  Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 62; Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost, 75.

26.  Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 110–12; Dedkov, Konservativnyi liberalizm, 37.

27.  Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 113.

28.  Ibid., 110–15.

29.  Ibid., 116–21.

30.  “Prime minister” slightly oversimplifies. From 1903 to October 1905 he was chairman of the “committee” of ministers, and from then till his dismissal in April 1906, chairman of the “council” of ministers. The difference between committee and council is that, associated with that change in name, was a jump upward in the authority of the chairman to coordinate the cabinet.

31.  Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 133–36; see also Jonathan Daly, “Political Crime in Late Imperial Russia,” Journal of Modern History 74, no. 1 (March 2002), 62–100, 94n138.

32.  Ivanova, “Rol V. A. Maklakova,” 58, citing GIM, fond 442, ll. 112–112ob. Bogoslovskii identifies V. A. Dolgorukov as the crucial contact—mistakenly, so far as it appears.

33.  Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 138.

34.  Ibid., 72.

35.  Dedkov, Konservativnyi liberalizm, 36.

36.  Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 60, 88–90.

37.  Ibid., 142–49.

38.  Ibid., 148–49.

39.  Ibid., 150–51.

40.  Ibid., 78–80, 84–86.

41.  Ibid., 90.

42.  Ibid., 92, 97–99.

43.  Ibid., 100–101; Bakhmetev-Maklakov Correspondence, 1:508 (citing Ariadne Tyrkova-Williams, “Russkii parlamentarii,” Novyi Zhurnal, no. 52 [1958], 238).

44.  Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 103–4.

45.  Ibid., 108–10.

46.  Ibid., 106, 136–38.

47.  Ibid., 18–19, 163–64.

48.  Ibid., 164–65; see also V. A. Maklakov, “Lev Tolstoi: Uchenie i Zhizn” [Leo Tolstoy: Teaching and life], in V. A. Maklakov, O Lve Tolstom: Dve Rechi [On Leo Tolstoy: Two speeches] (Paris: Annales contemporaines, 1929), 54–55.

49.  Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 165. In his account of his student years, Maklakov seems to have placed the Singer event ahead of the relief efforts because it was a natural follow-up to his own obvious excitement at merely seeing Tolstoy.

50.  Georgii Adamovich, Vasilii Alekseevich Maklakov: Politik, Iurist, Chelovek [Vasily Alekseevich Maklakov: Politician, jurist, human being] (Paris, 1959), 81; Dedkov, Konservativnyi liberalizm, 128.

51.  Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 165–68.

52.  V. A. Maklakov, “Lev Tolstoi kak obshchestvennyi deiatel” [Leo Tolstoy as a public figure], in V. A. Maklakov, Rechi: Sudebniia, Dymskiia i Publichniia Lektsii, 1904–1926 [V. A. Maklakov, Speeches: Judicial, Duma and public lectures, 1904–1926] (Paris: Izdanie Iubileinogo Komiteta, 1869–1949), 142.

53.  Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 181.

54.  Ibid., 197–201.

55.  Dedkov, Konservativnyi liberalizm, 51.

56.  Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 203.

57.  Ibid., 185–88.

58.  Ibid., 213, 216–17.

59.  Ibid., 218–19.

60.  Ibid., 225–30. Apropos of exam preparation as a sporting achievement, Maklakov once said, in an homage to Vinogradov, “I felt an irresistible weakness for examinations as a kind of sport.” Maklakov, “Vinogradov,” 636.

      CHAPTER 2: TRIAL LAWYER

1.    William E. Pomeranz, The Emergence and Development of the Russian Advokatura: 1864–1905 (PhD dissertation, University of London, 1990), 78–80, 84. The rules were somewhat relaxed in the period from 1896 to 1910 but were then restored in their full restrictive vigor. In chapter 17 we’ll see Maklakov ending these restrictions in one of the first reforms of the February Revolution.

2.    Ibid., 184.

3.    V. A. Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii (New York: Chekhov Publishing House [Izdatelstvo imeni Chekhova], 1954), 231–34; V. A. Maklakov, “F. I. Rodichev i A. R. Lednitskii,” Novyi Zhurnal, no. 16 (1947), 240, 244–45; Vaclav Lednitskii, “Vokrug V. A. Maklakova (lichnye vospominaniia)” [Around V. A. Maklakov (personal reminiscences)], Novyi Zhurnal, no. 56 (March 1959), 222–50.

4.    Maklakov, “F. I. Rodichev i A. R. Lednitskii,” 245.

5.    Girish N. Bhat, “The Moralization of Guilt in Late Imperial Russian Trial by Jury: The Early Reform Era,” Law and History Review 15, no. 1 (Spring 1997), 77–113; Samuel Kucherov, Courts, Lawyers, and Trials under the Last Three Tsars (New York: F. A. Praeger, 1953), 64–68.

6.    Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 282–86.

7.    Ibid., 235–38.

8.    See Lev N. Tolstoi, Polnoe Sobranie sochinenii [Complete works], ed. G. Chertkov, 90 vols. (Moscow: Gos. izd-vo khudozh. lit-ry, 1928–58), 70:453–54; 73:287; 79–80:113, 163–64; 81:217–18, for letters from Tolstoy to Maklakov.

9.    Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 238–47.

10.  Ibid., 248–50.

11.  Ibid., 250–56.

12.  L. I. Goldman, Politicheskie protsessy v Rossii, 1901–1917 (Moscow: 1932), 42, 45, 57, 76, 141–43, 146.

13.  “Sudebnaia khronika,” in Russkie Vedomosti (c. July 23, 1906), located in GIM, fond 31, delo 87, l. 235. For praise of Maklakov’s eloquence in this summation by a fellow defense lawyer, see A. A. Goldenbeizer, “Vospominaniia o V. A. Maklakove,” Novoe Russkoe Slovo (July 28, 1957), 2.

14.  Kucherov, Courts, Lawyers, and Trials, 235–38; Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 275–77.

15.  Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 276. The new code had been nominally adopted in 1903, but its provisions on political and religious crimes, the only ones finally approved, were put into effect in June 1904. Jonathan W. Daly, “Political Crime in Late Imperial Russia,” Journal of Modern History 74, no. 1 (March 2002), 62, 71.

16.  Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 264–67, 275–76.

17.  Jonathan W. Daly, “On the Significance of Emergency Legislation in Late Imperial Russia,” Slavic Review 54 (Autumn 1995), 602, 624.

18.  Georgii Adamovich, Vasilii Alekseevich Maklakov: Politik, Iurist, Chelovek [Vasily Alekseevich Maklakov: Politician, jurist, human being] (Paris, 1959), 241n*.

19.  M. L. Mandelshtam, 1905 god v politicheskikh protsessakh: Zapiski zashchitnika [The year 1905 in political trials: Notes of a defense counsel] (Moscow: Izdatelstvo polikatorzhan, 1931), 101.

20.  V. A. Maklakov, Vlast i Obshchestvennost na zakate staroi Rossii (Vospominaniia sovremenika) [State and society in the twilight of old Russia (Recollections of a contemporary)] (Paris: Izdanie zhurnala “Illustrirovanaia Rossiia,” 1936), 170–73.

21.  Ibid., 174.

22.  Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 294; Marina Aleksandrovna Ivanova, “Rol V. A. Maklakova v Obshchestvenno-politicheskoi zhizni Rossii” [The role of V. A. Maklakov in the social-political life of Russia] (PhD thesis, Rossiiskii Universitet Druzhby Narodov, 1997), 95–97, citing GIM, fond 31, dela 92, 108, 110–12, 117, 122, 125–29, and 131–32.

23.  Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 292–93.

24.  A. Lunacharskii, K. Radek, and L. Trotskii, Siluety: Politicheskie portrety [Silhouettes: Political portraits] (Moscow: Izdatelstvo politicheskoi literatury, 1991), 237. Trotsky’s comment originally appeared in an article on Miliukov in the newspaper Luch, nos. 6–7 (September 22–23, 1912). See http://magister.msk.ru/library/trotsky/trotm193.htm.

25.  N. I. Dedkov, Konservativnyi liberalizm Vasiliia Maklakova (Moscow: AIRO-XX, 2005), 113–14.

26.  David Arwyn Davies, V. A. Maklakov and the Problem of Russia’s Westernization (PhD thesis, University of Washington, 1967), 37 and n29. Davies learnt of the practice from M. Kantor, a close personal friend of Maklakov in his later years.

27.  The Beilis trial illustrated a somewhat different procedure, in which a “civil plaintiff” appears in a criminal trial on behalf of a party claiming injury, there evidently the family of the murder victim. See chapter 9 for details in connection with Beilis.

28.  V. A. Maklakov, “F. N. Plevako,” in V. A. Maklakov, Rechi: Sudebniia, Dymskiia i Publichniia Lektsii, 1904–1926 [V. A. Maklakov, Speeches: Judicial, Duma and public lectures, 1904–1926] (Paris: Izdanie Iubileinogo Komiteta, 1869–1949), 71, 72, 112.

29.  Ibid., 75–85.

30.  Iosif V. Gessen, V Dvukh vekakh: Zhiznennyi otchet [In two centuries: A life’s account], Arkhiv Russkoi Revoliutsii 22 (1937), 170–71. Gessen was also a Kadet party leader, Duma member, and advocate.

31.  Adamovich, Vasilii Alekseevich Maklakov, 68–69.

32.  Lednitskii, “Vokrug V. A. Maklakova,” 222, 235.

33.  Ibid., 226.

34.  Maklakov, “F. N. Plevako,” 97–99, 101.

35.  Ibid., 104, 104; Adamovich, Vasilii Alekseevich Maklakov, 60.

36.  Maklakov, “F. N. Plevako,” 100–101.

37.  Ibid., 105–6.

38.  Ibid., 112.

39.  Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost, 165–66; Pomeranz, Emergence and Development, 221.

40.  Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost, 167–68; Maklakov, Iz Vospominaniia, 348, and, speaking of citizens who went to electoral meetings in the same terms as he had used for jurors, 356–57.

41.  Gessen, V Dvukh vekakh, 183. See Shmuel Galai, The Liberation Movement in Russia, 1900–1905 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973), 247, regarding Maklakov’s leadership role.

42.  Galai, Liberation Movement, 245–48. Though Galai identifies Maklakov as a leader of the union of lawyers on page 247, it is not clear if he exercised any of that leadership after the 1905 change described in the text.

43.  This was technically the All-Russian Peasants Union. It had few peasant members and was really an extension of the union of agronomists and statisticians. See Galai, Liberation Movement, 253.

44.  Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost, 361–62, 365–68.

45.  Bakhmetev-Maklakov Correspondence, 3:97–98 (Maklakov to Bakhmetev, November 23, 1923); Dmitrii Vladimirovich Aronov, Pervyi spiker (Moscow: Iurist, 2006), 92–95; N. A. Kaklukov, “V Moskovskoi Iuridicheskom Obshchestve” [In the Moscow Juridical Society], in Sergei Andreevich Muromtsev (Moscow: Izd. M. i S. Sabashnikovykh, 1911), 134–40.

      CHAPTER 3: FRIENDS AND LOVERS

1.    GIM, fond 31, delo 69, l. 1 (letter of June 18, 1903, from Chekhov to Maklakov).

2.    V. A. Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii (New York: Chekhov Publishing House, 1954), 174–75.

3.    See Marina Aleksandrovna Ivanova, “Rol V. A. Maklakova v Obshchestvenno-politicheskoi zhizni Rossii” [The role of V. A. Maklakov in the social-political life of Russia] (PhD thesis, Rossiiskii Universitet Druzhby Narodov, 1997), 102, 217n46 (citing GIM, fond 31, delo 150) (letter to Maklakov acknowledging his role as a prototype).

4.    GIM, fond 31, delo 110.

5.    See I. Kashuk, “Poslednii god Shaliapina” [Chaliapin’s last year], Illiustrirovanniia Rossiia, 684, no. 26 ([June 18], 1938), 3–5.

6.    V. A. Maklakov, “Lev Tolstoi: Uchenie i Zhizn” [Leo Tolstoy: Teaching and life], in V. A. Maklakov, O Lve Tolstom: Dve Rechi [On Leo Tolstoy: Two speeches] (Paris: Annales contemporaines, 1929), 7–57.

7.    See Tyrkova-Williams Diary and Letters, 1011–16 (Maklakov to Ariadne Tyrkova-Williams, October 12, 1955, and November 3, 1955).

8.    Maklakov, “Lev Tolstoi: Uchenie i Zhizn,” 10, 13.

9.    Ibid., 20–24.

10.  Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 169–70.

11.  Maklakov, “Lev Tolstoi: Uchenie i Zhizn,” 29–30.

12.  Ibid., 31.

13.  Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 170.

14.  V. A. Maklakov, “Lev Tolstoi kak obshchestvennyi deiatel” [Leo Tolstoy as a public figure], in V. A. Maklakov, Rechi: Sudebniia, Dumskiia i Publichniia Lektsii, 1904–1926 [V. A. Maklakov, Speeches: Judicial, Duma and public lectures, 1904–1926] (Paris: Izdanie Iubileinogo Komiteta, 1869–1949), 146–48.

15.  Ibid., 153.

16.  Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 173; “Lev Tolstoi: Uchenie i Zhizn,” 49–50.

17.  “Lev Tolstoi: Uchenie i Zhizn,” 47–48. Maklakov also observed: “The degree of a person’s religiosity is defined not so much by his views as by the seriousness for him of those questions and interests that religion answers.” V. A. Maklakov, “Tolstoi—kak Mirovoe Yavlenie” [“Tolstoy as a world presence”], in V. A. Maklakov, O Lve Tolstom: Dve Rechi [On Leo Tolstoy: Two speeches] (Paris: Annales contemporaines, 1929), 71.

18.  V. A. Maklakov, “Tolstoi i sud” [Tolstoy and the courts], in V. A. Maklakov, Rechi: Sudebniia, Dumskiia i Publichniia Lektsii, 1904–1926 [V. A. Maklakov, Speeches: Judicial, Duma and public lectures, 1904–1926] (Paris: Izdanie Iubileinogo Komiteta, 1869–1949), 168.

19.  Ibid, 171.

20.  Ibid., 173–74.

21.  Ibid., 181.

22.  Ibid., 189–90; Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 178–81.

23.  Maklakov, “Tolstoi i sud,” 192.

24.  See chapter 2.

25.  This is confirmed in many references to social events with “the Maklakovs” in The Diaries of Sofia Tolstoy, trans. Cathy Porter (New York: Harper Perennial, 2009), a group that clearly included his sister Mariia and brother Alexei.

26.  Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 168.

27.  Maklakov, “Lev Tolstoi: Uchenie i Zhizn,” 52.

28.  Ibid., 53.

29.  Ibid., 56–57.

30.  GDSO, Second Duma, March 12, 1907, Meeting 8, cols. 391–92.

31.  See Ivanova, “Rol V. A. Maklakova,” 187, 230n103 (citing GIM, fond 31, delo 1).

32.  GIM, fond 31, opis: describing dela 5 (124), 6 (114), 11 (199), 12 (194), 54 (225), 78 (319), 79 (439), 80 (500), 81 (337), 82 (207), 83 (201). The correspondence amounts to eleven folders, each having no less than 124 pages and no more than 500.

33.  GIM, fond 31, dela 11 and 12.

34.  The Kollontai-Maklakov letters have been transcribed and posted on the Internet; see http://ru-lib.3dn.ru/publ/kollontaj_aleksandra_mikhajlovna_pisma_k_v_a_maklakovu/1-1-0-460.

35.  Hoover, 1–3. The passage is part of a brief snippet on Maklakov in Rosa Vinaver’s draft memoir of Paul Miliukov.

36.  GIM, fond 31, delo 11, l. 1.

37.  Ibid., l. 3.

38.  Ibid., l. 6.

39.  Ibid., ll. 14, 9.

40.  Ibid., l. 15.

41.  Kollontai-Maklakov Letters, Letter no. 14 (as numbered on website). The speeches on the peasant question seem necessarily to be those of June 1916, discussed in chapter 12, as those were the only ones where Maklakov focused on peasant issues. Kollontai’s hesitancy about the “later ones” may be because they reflect his reluctance to try to extend the reform to achieve Jewish equality; as we’ll see, he believed that such an extension would jeopardize passage of the peasant reform.

42.  Barbara Evans Clements, Bolshevik Feminist: The Life of Alexandra Kollontai (Bloomington and London: Indiana University Press, 1979), 253.

43.  Ibid., 183–99.

44.  Ignazio Silone, Emergency Exit (London: Victor Gollanz, 1969), 68.

45.  Kollontai-Maklakov Letters, letter nos. 9 and 13.

46.  Ibid., letter no. 14.

47.  Ibid., letter nos. 7 and 14.

48.  Ibid., letter no. 10.

      CHAPTER 4: INTO POLITICS

1.    V. A. Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost na zakate staroi Rossii (Vospominaniia sovremenika) [State and society in the twilight of old Russia (Recollections of a contemporary)] (Paris: Izdanie zhurnala “Illustrirovannaia Rossiia,” 1936), 306–11; V. A. Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii (New York: Chekhov Publishing House, 1954), 328–32. Maklakov’s view that the peasants’ inability to develop reasoned solutions was due to lack of experience finds support in the finding that IQ has been steadily rising at a fairly steady pace around the globe, which is known after its discoverer as the “Flynn effect”; one of the explanatory theories for the effect is that modern life has increased the occasions calling on people to deploy analytic reasoning. Steven Pinker, The Better Angels of Our Nature (New York: Penguin, 2012), 650–57.

2.    GIM, fond 31 (papers of V. A. Maklakov), delo 141, ll. 139–42 (both sides); Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 333; Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost, 311–12. The memo is undated, but as the local committees started collecting evidence in August 1902 and reporting to St. Petersburg by the end of July 1903, those dates must frame the period of the memo’s circulation; David A. J. Macey, Government and Peasant in Russia, 1861–1906 (DeKalb: Northern Illinois University Press, 1987), 70.

3.    Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 335–36.

4.    Ibid., 336.

5.    Shmuel Galai, The Liberation Movement in Russia, 1900–1905 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973), 47–52 (at 52 and 55 he uses the adjective “semi-conspiratorial”); Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 336; Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost, 291–94.

6.    Galai, Liberation Movement, 52–56; Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost, 293–94.

7.    Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost, 295.

8.    Ibid., 294–95. This passage is also quoted in K. A. Soloviev, Kruzhok “Beseda.” V poiskakh novoi politicheskoi real’nosti 1899–1905 [The Beseda Circle: In search of a new political reality, 1899–1905] (Moscow: ROSSPEN, 2009), 231.

9.    Abraham Ascher, The Revolution of 1905, 2 vols. (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1992), 1:77–92.

10.  I. A. Isakov, “Kak nachalos Krovavoe voskresenie [How Bloody Sunday happened],” Voprosy istorii [Historical questions] 4 (1996), 175.

11.  See Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost, 345–49; Ascher, Revolution of 1905, 1:90–95; Martha Bohachevsky-Chomiak, Sergei N. Trubetskoi: An Intellectual among the Intelligentsia in Prerevolutionary Russia (Belmont, MA: Nordland Publishing, 1976), 140–41, citing Sergei N. Trubetskoi, Sobranie Sochinenii kn. Sergeia Nikolaevicha Trubetskogo, ed. L. M. Lopatin (Moscow, 1907–1912), 1:397–99, for the wording of the minority statement. Bohachevsky-Chomiak gives the vote as 219 to 147; Maklakov reports it as 219 to 153. Either way, the sum adds up to more than the total membership, so clearly some people voted for both the liberal and the conservative variants.

12.  See, for example, Maklakov’s caustic comments on E. de Roberti’s saying that the destruction of five to twenty gentry estates had no meaning at all and expressing concern only for estates burned by the Black Hundreds. V. A. Maklakov, Vtoraia Gosudarstvennaia Duma [The Second State Duma] (Moscow: Tsentrpoligraf, 2006), 262.

13.  See Soloviev, Kruzhok “Beseda,” 222, citing GIM, fond 31, delo 142, ll. 245 and 245ob; Marina Aleksandrovna Ivanova, “Rol V. A. Maklakova v Obshchestvenno-politicheskoi zhizni Rossii” [The role of V. A. Maklakov in the social-political life of Russia] (PhD thesis, Rossiiskii Universitet Druzhby Narodov, 1997), 109–10, citing the same pages but in delo 148.

14.  Galai, Liberation Movement, 219.

15.  Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost, 509–10; Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 344–45.

16.  Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost, 480–81; Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 343–45. Neither the remark on possible future responsibility nor the talking-to that he gave the policeman is recorded in the formal minutes of the congress, but it is plain that those minutes are radically incomplete.

17.  Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost, 475; Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 340.

18.  V. A. Maklakov, “F. N. Plevako,” in V. A. Maklakov, Rechi: Sudebniia, Dumskiia i Publichniia Lektsii, 1904–1926 [V. A. Maklakov, Speeches: Judicial, Duma and public lectures, 1904–1926] (Paris: Izdanie Iubileinogo Komiteta, 1869–1949), 102.

19.  Ascher, Revolution of 1905, 1:228–29.

20.  Ibid., 2:45.

21.  A. A. Kizevetter, Na rubezhe dvukh stoletii: Vospominaniia [On the Border of Two Centuries: Memoirs] (Moscow: Iskusstvo, 1996), 391–92.

22.  Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost, 346; Paul Miliukov, Political Memoirs, 66; Paul Miliukov, Vospominaniia (Moscow: Sovremennik, 1990), 1:316. Although Miliukov expresses uncertainty over the wording of his reaction, he acknowledges expression of the general sentiment—we “mustn’t leave our battle positions.” See also Galai, Liberation Movement, 264.

23.  V. V. Shelokhaev, ed., Sezdy i konferentsii Konstitutsionno-demokraticheskoi partii [Congresses and Conferences of the Constitutional Democratic Party] (Moscow: ROSSPEN, 1997), 1:31–33. See also Shmuel Galai, “Konstitutsionalisty-demokraty i ikh kritiki [The Constitutional Democrats and their critics],” Voprosy istorii [Historical questions] no. 12 (1991), 3, 10, 13.

24.  Pravo (Law), no. 44, November 13, 1905, 3619–20. The Congress adopted a resolution that included the “precious achievement” language, but that was considerably vaguer in its demands on the government. Pravo (Law), nos. 45/46, November 20, 1905, 3701–3.

25.  Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost, 434–35.

26.  Ibid., 435.

27.  Anthony Kroner, “The Debate between Miliukov and Maklakov on the Chances for Russian Liberalism,” Revolutionary Russia 7, no. 2 (1994), 239, 253. Miliukov himself wrote that “the choice of Kokoshkin meant that the Bureau did not want compromise decisions.” P. N. Miliukov, Tri Popytki [Three Attempts] (Paris: Presse Franco-Russe, 1921), 11; see also Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost, 436–37.

28.  Paul Miliukov, “Politika v ‘Sovremennykh zapiskakh,’” [Politics in “Contemporary Notes”], Poslednie Novosti [Recent news], April 4, 1929, col. 6.

29.  Geoffrey A. Hosking, The Russian Constitutional Experiment: Government and Duma, 1907–1914 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973), 16; Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost, 437–39.

30.  Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost, 440–41 (quoting Miliukov’s Tri Popytki); Hosking, Russian Constitutional Experiment, 17n16 (citing Witte’s memoirs).

31.  Miliukov, Vospominaniia (1859–1917) (New York: Chekhov Publishing House, 1955), 1:314–18, 328. Belgium and Bulgaria seem to have been the “go-to” countries for people in autocracies in search of a constitution; Iranian liberals turned to them in 1907. See Christopher de Bellaigue, The Islamic Enlightenment: The Struggle between Faith and Reason, 1798 to Modern Times (New York: Liveright Publishing, 2017), 241–43.

32.  See chapter 12.

33.  Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost, 444–46.

34.  Ascher, Revolution of 1905, 1:312.

35.  M. L. Mandelshtam, 1905 god v politicheskikh protsessakh: Zapiski zashchitnika [The year 1905 in political trials: Notes of a defense counsel] (Moscow: Izdatelstvo polikatorzhan, 1931), 327.

36.  Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost, 429.

37.  Francis W. Wcislo, Tales of Imperial Russia: The Life and Times of Sergei Witte, 1849–1915 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), 232–33.

38.  Ivanova, “Rol V. A. Maklakova V. A. Maklakov,” 121, 219n91 (citing GARF, fond 523, delo 261, l. 27). In a conversation with Stolypin during the First Duma, Miliukov evidently claimed that if a Kadet cabinet adopted its proposed reforms and the revolutionary left nonetheless sought to overthrow the government, Miliukov would shoot the revolutionaries down, “more freely than Stolypin himself.” Stolypin claimed to have replied that, as a liberal humanitarian, having just abolished the death penalty and brought about a general amnesty, Miliukov “could not use such energetic measures without completely discrediting himself and his party. Within a month he would be compelled to resign, and would disappear in a deluge of execration launched at him by his former admirers.” Peter Enticott, The Russian Liberals and the Revolution of 1905 (London and New York: Routledge, 2016), 129.

39.  Bismarck’s exact statement appears to have been less pithy: “An experienced constitutional statesman has said that all of constitutional life is one long series of compromises.” Lothar Gall, ed., Bismarck: Die grossen Reden, 62–63, 66–76. “Clinton, Bush Share Laughs and Memories at Launch of Scholars Program,” Wall Street Journal, September 9, 2014.

40.  The Logan Act, 18 U.S.C. § 953.

41.  See Olga Crisp, “The Russian Liberals and the 1906 Anglo-French Loan to Russia,” Slavonic and East European Review 39, no. 93 (June 1961), 497–511; James William Long, “Organized Protest against the 1906 Russian Loan,” Cahiers du monde Russe et soviétique 13, no. 1 (1972), 24–39.

42.  Long, “Organized Protest,” 28n5; compare Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 321, discussing his having started a practice of Christmas and Easter vacations in France in 1897. Long cites Miliukov’s account, written in emigration, reporting that the Kadet central committee had been asked to consent to party leaders’ joining the French campaign against the loan, a request the central committee rejected. Long thinks that “perhaps this is where [Maklakov] got the idea.” Long, “Organized Protest,” 28. In fact Maklakov and other Kadets in France did communicate a proposal of such involvement (which indeed the central committee rejected), but they made the proposal after Maklakov’s anti-loan activities in Paris. The later events (the exchange on party involvement) could not have prompted the earlier ones (Maklakov’s activities).

43.  See Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 321, for his regular practice; Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost, 529, for this specific occasion.

44.  Long, “Organized Protest,” 28–30; Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost, 529.

45.  Crisp, “The Russian Liberals,” 508–11.

46.  Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost, 530.

47.  Compare Crisp, “The Russian Liberals,” 508n39, with Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost, 531–32.

48.  See Crisp, “The Russian Liberals,” 509 (text of memo, emphasis added).

49.  Ibid., 510–11.

50.  Ibid., 510.

51.  Ibid., 509.

52.  Long, “Organized Protest,” 25.

53.  Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost, 533–37.

54.  Long states that the loan was actually signed April 16, two days before the apparent delivery of Maklakov’s memo; Long, “Organized Protest,” 25.

55.  Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost, 537–38.

56.  Ibid., 541–42.

57.  Ibid., 539–41.

      CHAPTER 5: A CONSTITUTION FOR RUSSIA?

1.    V. A. Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost na zakate staroi Rossii (Vospominaniia sovremenika) [State and society in the twilight of old Russia (Recollections of a contemporary)] (Paris: Izdanie zhurnala “Illustrirovanaia Rossiia,” 1936), 556–59.

2.    For example, certain provisions of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 and the USA PATRIOT Act give the president the authority to declare a national emergency and then to administer laws that would otherwise have lapsed, such as the export control regime. See 50 U.S.C. §§ 1701–1702.

3.    Ben-Cion Pinchuk, The Octobrists in the Third Duma, 1907–1912 (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1974), 178–79; GDSO, Third Duma, 5th Sess., pt. 1, October 17, 1911, cols. 125–55, 185–90. For the 1903 change, see Polnoe Sobranie Zakonov, III, No. 23180 (June 20, 1903).

4.    Maklakov, State and Society, 595–96. All translations of the Fundamental Laws are from Marc Szeftel, The Russian Constitution of April 23, 1906 (Brussels: Librairie Encyclopédique, 1976), unless otherwise noted.

5.    Ibid.

6.    Maklakov mistakenly says that the laws had said that for 109 years. Ibid., 563–64. But they had only been promulgated in 1833. The reference may be to the accession to the throne in 1796 of the emperor Paul, an outspoken proponent of autocracy. See Abraham Ascher, The Revolution of 1905, 2 vols. (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1992), 2:65n*.

7.    Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost, 567.

8.    Szeftel, The Russian Constitution, 99.

9.    Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost, 575.

10.  The western zemstvo legislation, discussed in chapter 8.

11.  Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost, 577–79 (N. A. Khomiakov’s term).

12.  Ibid., 579. The Second Duma did vote down a handful of provisions adopted in the lengthy period between the first two Dumas.

13.  V. A. Maklakov, Vtoraia Gosudarstvennaia Duma [The Second State Duma] (Moscow: Tsentrpoligraf, 2006), 175.

14.  See chapter 12.

15.  Olga Crisp, “The Russian Liberals and the 1906 Anglo-French Loan to Russia,” Slavonic and East European Review 39, no. 93 (June 1961), 497, 510.

16.  Under Article 100 of the Fundamental Laws, he could not increase that share.

17.  Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost, 586–93; GDSO, Third Duma, 4th Sess., pt. 3, April 27, 1911, col. 2880. See also Tsuyoshi Hasegawa, The February Revolution (Seattle and London: University of Washington Press, 1981), 149 (discussing Nicholas II’s right-wing transformation of the State Council on January 1, 1917).

18.  Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost, 586–88; Abraham Ascher, P. A. Stolypin: The Search for Stability in Late Imperial Russia (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2001), 281–90.

19.  Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost, 580–82.

20.  Ibid., 582.

21.  Ibid., 570–73.

22.  Uchrezhdenie Gosudarstvennoi Dumy [Statute of the State Duma], Articles 55–57.

23.  Peter Enticott, The Russian Liberals and the Revolution of 1905 (London and New York: Routledge, 2016), 85, 116.

24.  V. A. Maklakov, Pervaia Gosudarstvennaia Duma [The First State Duma] (Moscow: Tsentrpoligraf, 2006); Maklakov, “1905–1906 gody” [The years 1905–1906], in Vinaver i russkaia obshchestvennost nachala XX veka; sbornik stateĭ [Vinaver and Russian society at the start of the twentieth century: Collected articles] (Paris: Imp. Cooperative Étoile, 1937), 53–96.

25.  Vladimir Kokovtsov, Out of My Past (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1935), 126.

26.  Enticott, Russian Liberals, 94.

27.  Ascher, The Revolution of 1905, 2:64–69.

28.  Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost, 544–46.

      CHAPTER 6: THE FIRST DUMA: TAKE-OFF AND CRASH LANDING

1.    Abraham Ascher, The Revolution of 1905, 2 vols. (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1992), 2:51, 77; Tyrkova-Williams Diary and Letters, 914 (Maklakov to Tyrkova-Williams, August 8, 1945).

2.    V. A. Maklakov, Pervaia Gosudarstvennaia Duma [The First State Duma] (Moscow: Tsentrpoligraf, 2006), 127–28. GDSO, First Duma, Meeting 8, May 13, 1906, pp. 321–24 (government speech); ibid., Ukazatel, pp. 244–47 (listing ministry bills relating to these topics).

3.    V. A. Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost na zakate staroi Rossii (Vospominaniia sovremenika) [State and society in the twilight of old Russia (Recollections of a contemporary)] (Paris: Izdanie zhurnala “Illustrirovanaia Rossiia,” 1936), 514–16; A. Ia. Avrekh, Tsarizm i IV Duma, 1912–1914 gg. [Tsarism and the Fourth Duma, 1912–1914] (Moscow: Izdaletsvo Nauka, 1981), 189; P. N. Miliukov, “V. A. Maklakov mezhdu ‘obshchestvennostiu i vlastiu, II,’” Poslednie Novosti [Recent news], May 30, 1937.

4.    See Steven Pinker, The Better Angels of Our Nature (New York: Penguin, 2012), 490–92.

5.    See Francis W. Wcislo, Tales of Imperial Russia: The Life and Times of Sergei Witte, 1849–1915 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), 234.

6.    Maklakov, Pervaia Gosudarstvennaia Duma, 40–41.

7.    Ibid., 41, citing V. N. Kokovtsov, Iz Moego Proshlago (The Hague and Paris: Mouton, 1969 [reprint of 1933 edition]), 1:168–69 (translated as Vladimir Kokovtsov, Out of My Past [Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1935], 126). In chapter 7 I discuss Maklakov’s description of the treatment of agrarian issues in the Second Duma, from which he draws (possibly optimistic) inferences about the feasibility of progress even on divisive issues.

8.    Duma Address to the Tsar, GDSO, First Duma, Meeting 5, May 5, 1906, pp. 239–41. The Duma’s address did not explicitly call for four-tailed suffrage, but in the context of electoral laws that provided nearly universal male suffrage and the Kadet background on this, its literal call for “universal” suffrage was bound to be understood as demanding the familiar “four-tailed” version.

9.    Maklakov, Pervaia Gosudarstvennaia Duma, 94–95.

10.  Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost, 555 (Miliukov at the April 1906 Kadet party congress); Sezdy i konferentsii, 1:349 (statement of third party congress, April 21–25, 1906).

11.  Duma Address to the Tsar, First Duma, Meeting 5, May 5, 1906, 240. As a historian, Maklakov later wrote that at their January and April 1906 congresses the Kadets had adopted resolutions forbidding participation in legislative work until the constitution was reformed. Maklakov, Pervaia Gosudarstvennaia Duma, 59. Although there was clearly much sentiment to that effect, the congresses do not seem to have established such an absolute priority. See, for example, Sezdy i konferentsii, 1:116–17 (January), 246 (April).

12.  Maklakov, Pervaia Gosudarstvennaia Duma, 237. Kizevetter was also struck by this episode. See A. A. Kizevetter, Na rubezhe dvukh stoletii: Vospominaniia [On the Border of Two Centuries: Memoirs] (Moscow: Iskusstvo, 1996), 432.

13.  Maklakov, Pervaia Gosudarstvennaia Duma, 238.

14.  Ibid., 138. GDSO, First Duma, Meeting 8, May 13, 1906, p. 326.

15.  Dmitrii Vladimirovich Aronov, Pervyi spiker [First speaker] (Moscow: Iurist, 2006), 142–43; GDSO, First Duma, Meeting 1, April 27, 1906, p. 3.

16.  For the way the extraordinary security laws enabled application of the death penalty, see William C. Fuller, “Civilians in Military Courts, 1881–1904,” Russian Review 41, no. 3 (July 1982), 288, 292. Note that with such a transfer under the extraordinary security laws, the applicable law in the military courts was wartime law, with far more severe penalties than peacetime military law, including the death penalty in specific classes in cases.

17.  GDSO, First Duma, Meeting 29, June 19, 1906, p. 1503.

18.  Maklakov reviews this in “1905–1906 gody” [The years 1905–1906], in Vinaver i russkaia obshchestvennost nachala XX veka; sbornik stateĭ [Vinaver and Russian society at the start of the twentieth century: Collected articles] (Paris: Imp. Cooperative Étoile, 1937), 53, 84–88; and in Pervaia Gosudarstvennaia Duma, 196–202. Benjamin Beuerle, “A Step for ‘The Whole Civilized World’: The Debate over the Death Penalty in Russia,1905–1917,” in One Law for All?: Western Models and Local Practices in (Post-) Imperial Contexts, ed. Stefan B. Kirmse (Frankfurt am Main, New York: Campus, 2012), 39–66, 50 and n.22.

19.  Maklakov, Pervaia Gosudarstvennaia Duma, 88–89 (quoting Vinaver).

20.  Duma Address to the Tsar, First Duma, Meeting 5, May 5, 1906, 241. See also Maklakov, Pervaia Gosudarstvennaia Duma, 90–91.

21.  GDSO, First Duma, Meeting 8, May 13, 1906, p. 322.

22.  Maklakov, Pervaia Gosudarstvennaia Duma, 284–85.

23.  Ibid., 225–30; Maklakov, La Chute, 78; Shmuel Galai, “Kadet Domination of the First Duma and Its Limits,” in The Russian Revolution of 1905: Centenary Perspectives, ed. Jonathan D. Smele and Anthony Heywood (London and New York: Routledge, 2005), 196, 204.

24.  Abraham Ascher, P. A. Stolypin: The Search for Stability in Late Imperial Russia (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2001), 138 (3,611 employees killed from October 1905 through September 1906); Ascher, The Revolution of 1905, 2:95 (mock letter to Rodichev); Maklakov, Pervaia Gosudarstvennaia Duma, 99–114; Shmuel Galai, “The Impact of the Vyborg Manifesto on the Fortunes of the Kadet Party,” Revolutionary Russia 20, no. 2 (December 2007), 197, 216 (finding the Kadet position “neither very coherent nor persuasive”).

25.  Galai, “The Impact of the Vyborg Manifesto,” 199.

26.  Galai, “Kadet Domination,” 205.

27.  Maklakov, Pervaia Gosudarstvennaia Duma, 57–59.

28.  Ibid., 321–23.

29.  Ibid., 156–57. Stolypin, who had studied natural sciences at St. Petersburg University, may have gotten the idea from Robert G. Ingersoll (1833–1899), who had said, “There are in nature neither rewards nor punishments—there are only consequences.”

30.  Ibid., 155–59.

31.  Ian D. Thatcher, “The First State Duma, 1906: The View from the Contemporary Pamphlet and Monograph Literature,” Canadian Journal of History 46 (Winter 2011), 531–61, summarizes that literature as generally reflecting the Kadet perspective, along with Trudovik advocacy of greater militancy.

32.  Ascher, The Revolution of 1905, 2:202–9; Protokoly, 1:12 (from “Tragediia kadetskoi (konstitutsionno-demokraticheskoi) partii” [The tragedy of the Kadet (Constitutional Democratic) Party], by the editorial board of the collection); Kizevetter, Na rubezhe dvukh stoletii, 435.

33.  Aronov, Pervyi spiker, 168–74.

34.  V. A. Maklakov, “Delo o Podpisavshikh Vyborgskoe Vozzvanie” [The case against the signers of the Vyborg Manifesto], in V. A. Maklakov, Rechi: Sudebniia, Dymskiia i Publichniia Lektsii, 1904–1926 [V. A. Maklakov, Speeches: Judicial, Duma and public lectures, 1904–1926] (Paris: Izdanie Iubileinogo Komiteta, 1869–1949), 52–59.

35.  Mandelshtam, 1905 god v politicheskikh protsessakh, 357. The translation is mine, but has benefitted from that of Samuel Kucherov in his Courts, Lawyers, and Trials under the Last Three Tsars (New York: F. A. Praeger, 1953), 242. The word that I have translated as “rights” is ambiguous in Russian, and could mean “law.” Mandelshtam’s editor assumed it to be law, and then posed a question based on the assumption that law could be tsarist (bad) or proletarian (good). Maklakov noticed this, and, quoting the Mandelshtam passage and his editor’s question in his memoirs, answered in terms imputing to Mandelshtam (and thus to himself) the “rights” meaning. V. A. Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii (New York: Chekhov Publishing House [Izdatelstvo imeni Chekhova], 1954), 279.

36.  Aronov, Pervyi spiker, 174.

37.  Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii, 361.

      CHAPTER 7: THE SECOND DUMA: CHALLENGING STOLYPIN, ENGAGING STOLYPIN

1.    A. A. Kizevetter, Na rubezhe dvukh stoletii: Vospominaniia [On the Border of Two Centuries: Memoirs] (Moscow: Iskusstvo, 1996), 455–56.

2.    V. A. Maklakov, Vtoraia Gosudarstvennaia Duma [The Second State Duma] (Moscow: Tsentrpoligraf, 2006), 107–8.

3.    Kizevetter, Na rubezhe dvukh stoletii, 446.

4.    Maklakov, Vtoraia Gosudarstvennaia Duma, 75–79.

5.    See Kroner, The Debate Between Miliukov and Maklakov on the Chances for Russian Liberalism (Amsterdam, 1998), 112–14; Vestnik Partii Narodnoi Svobody no. 1 (1907), 45, 46, 48.

6.    S. V. Shelokhaev, D. N. Shipov: Lichnost i obshchestvenno-politicheskaia deiatelnost [D. N. Shipov: The Person and the public and political activity] (Moscow: ROSSPEN, 2010), 111–12.

7.    Abraham Ascher, The Revolution of 1905, 2 vols. (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1992), 2:51, 284; Don C. Rawson, Russian Rightists and the Revolution of 1905 (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995), 196–97. There are very small differences in classification between Ascher and Rawson.

8.    J. W. Riddle to Secretary of State Elihu Root, March 15, 1907 (n.s.). Numerical and Minor Files of the Department of State, 1906–1910, National Archives Microfilm Publication no. M862, roll 20, case nos. 69/66–79/135, no. 15, images 712 ff., https://catalog.archives.gov/id/19106425.

9.    Shmuel Galai, “The Jewish Question as a Russian Problem: The Debates in the First State Duma,” Revolutionary Russia 17, no. 1 (June 2004), 31, 48–49.

10.  Abraham Ascher, P. A. Stolypin: The Search for Stability in Late Imperial Russia (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2001), 138–42; Maklakov, Vtoraia Gosudarstvennaia Duma, 27–28.

11.  Melissa Kirschke Stockdale, Paul Miliukov and the Quest for a Liberal Russia, 1880–1918 (Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1996), 165.

12.  Sezdy i konferentsii, 1:623 (Central Committee member N. A. Gredeskul is quoting Maklakov to that effect in an effort to resist claims that the Kadet faction should have been more aggressive).

13.  Ascher, P. A. Stolypin, 187.

14.  GDSO, Second Duma, Meeting 5, March 6, 1907, cols. 106–20. Duplicated in P. A. Stolypin, Nam Nuzhna Velikaia Rossiia [We need a great Russia] (Moscow: Molodaia Gvardiia, 1991), 50–62.

15.  GDSO, Second Duma, Meeting 5, March 6, 1907, cols. 167–69. Duplicated in Stolypin, Nam Nuzhna, 64.

16.  Maklakov, Vtoraia Gosudarstvennaia Duma, 123–24.

17.  Ibid., 124.

18.  Anna Geifman, Thou Shalt Kill: Revolutionary Terrorism in Russia (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993), 20–21.

19.  Maklakov, Vtoraia Gosudarstvennaia Duma, 134–37.

20.  GDSO, Second Duma, Meeting 8, March 12, 1907, col. 390.

21.  Ibid., col. 392.

22.  Ibid., Meeting 9, March 13, 1907, cols. 513–14.

23.  GDSO, Second Duma, Meeting 9, March 13, 1907, col. 517.

24.  See the discussion in Stephen F. Williams, “A Kadet’s Critique of the Kadet Party: Vasily Maklakov,” Revolutionary Russia 23 (2010), 29–65.

25.  Tovarishch [Comrade], April 20, 1907, 3. This table excludes 42 death penalty verdicts in September from the “voenno-morsk. polevykh sudov.” The table also excludes figures from the ordinary military district courts (voenno-okr), and there are some discrepancies among the issues of Tovarishch. For example, the March 3, 1907 issue (p. 5) has February figures of 19 for the field courts martial and 22 for the military district courts. It may be that figures originally attributed to the military district courts were found later to be properly assignable to the field courts martial.

26.  For perspective on the tsarist regime in relation to its successors, consider that in the relatively tranquil years from 1962 through 1990, the Soviet Union executed about 24,000 people, or an average of nearly 1,000 a year, with 3,000 executions in 1962 alone. Frances Nethercott, Russian Legal Culture before and after Communism (London and New York: Routledge, 2007), 135. Another point of comparison might be the toll from the shooting of hostages in one day after Fanny Kaplan’s attempted assassination of Lenin. It’s fair to estimate that the day’s work exceeded eight months of the field courts martial, since 553 hostages were executed in Nizhny Novgorod and Petrograd alone, according to Izvestiia. Jonathan W. Daly, “Political Crime in Late Imperial Russia,” Journal of Modern History 74, no. 1 (March 2002), 62, 100.

27.  Bakhmetev-Maklakov Correspondence, 1:473 (Maklakov to Bakhmetev, August 30, 1921).

28.  For Maklakov’s Duma speeches on the subject, see the original attack on the field courts martial, GDSO, Second Duma, Meeting 8, March 12, 1907, cols. 390–91; ibid., Meeting 21, April 3, 1907, cols. 1586–91; ibid., Meeting 30, April 30, 1907, cols. 2297–2305. Maklakov recounts the full story in Vtoraia Gosudarstvennaia Duma, 188–97.

29.  GDSO, Second Duma, Meeting 49, May 28, 1907, cols. 1300–1305.

30.  Maklakov, Vtoraia Gosudarstvennaia Duma, 274–75.

31.  Ascher, The Revolution of 1905, 2:322–25; Maklakov, Vtoraia Gosudarstvennaia Duma, 262–85.

32.  Geifman, Thou Shalt Kill, 217–20; see also Stockdale, Paul Miliukov, 165–67.

33.  I’m using the Western term village not to mean a political entity but the economic and political unit technically called an obshchina, typically translated as “commune.”

34.  For some detail on the differences, see Stephen F. Williams, Liberal Reform in an Illiberal Regime: The Creation of Private Property in Russia, 1906–1915 (Stanford: Hoover Institution Press, 2006), 216–17, 220–23.

35.  V. Maklakov, “The Agrarian Problem in Russia before the Revolution,” Russian Review 9, no. 1 (January 1950), 3, 13.

36.  Ingeborg Fleischhauer, “The Agrarian Program of the Russian Constitutional Democrats,” Cahiers du Monde russe et soviétique [Notes on the Russian and Soviet world] 20, no. 2 (1979), 173, 184–86; V. V. Shelokhaev, “Agrarnia programma kadetov v pervoi Russkoi revoliutsii” [Agricultural program of the Kadets in the first Russian revolution], Istoricheskie Zapiski [Historical notes] 86 (1970), 172, 204–7.

37.  Fleischhauer, “The Agrarian Program,” 186.

38.  Leonard Schapiro, “The Vekhi Group and the Mystique of Revolution,” Slavonic and East European Review 34, no. 82 (December 1955), 56, 67.

39.  Maklakov, Vtoraia Gosudarstvennaia Duma, 173, 297–98.

40.  Ibid., 291.

41.  Ibid., 295; Tyrkova-Williams Diary and Letters, 875 (Maklakov to Ariadne Tyrkova-Williams, September 1, 1943).

42.  Maklakov, Vtoraia Gosudarstvennaia Duma, 296.

43.  Ibid., 297–98. Maklakov was convinced that the June 3 coup d’état would not have occurred if Stolypin had been sure that the law of November 9 would be accepted, albeit with major changes. See Bakhmetev-Maklakov Correspondence, 3:32 (Maklakov to Bakhmetev, July 4, 1923).

44.  Maklakov, Vtoraia Gosudarstvennaia Duma, 297–99.

45.  GDSO, Second Duma, Meeting 36, May 10, 1907, cols. 444–45; Maklakov, Vtoraia Gosudarstvennaia Duma, 301. The Stolypin speech is duplicated in Stolypin, Nam Nuzhna, 96.

46.  Maklakov, Vtoraia Gosudarstvennaia Duma, 303.

47.  Ibid.

48.  Ibid., 304–9; Tyrkova-Williams Diary and Letters, 401 (Tyrkova-Williams to Maklakov, April 16, 1944).

49.  Kizevetter, Na rubezhe dvukh stoletii, 463–64.

50.  Maklakov, Vtoraia Gosudarstvennaia Duma, 314–15.

51.  Ibid., 315.

52.  P. A. Pozhigailo, ed., P. A. Stolypin glazami sovremennikov [P. A. Stolypin through his contemporaries’ eyes] (Moscow: ROSSPEN, 2008), 118–19. See also what seems like a rather fanciful account by Vladimir Kokovtsov, Out of My Past (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1935), 185.

53.  Letter of Ambassador J. W. Riddle to Secretary of State Elihu Root, June 22, 1907 (n.s.). Numerical and Minor Files of the Department of State, 1906–1910, National Archives Microfilm Publication no. M862, roll 20, case nos. 69/66–79/135, no. 51, images 791 ff., https://catalog.archives.gov/id/19106425.

54.  Richard Pipes, Struve: Liberal on the Right, 1905–1944 (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1980), 63. Pipes generally draws his account from Maklakov’s and tells us that Struve confirmed Maklakov’s version. Ibid., 61n125.

55.  Iosif V. Gessen, V Dvukh vekakh: Zhiznennyi otchet [In two centuries: A life’s account], Arkhiv Russkoi Revoliutsii 22 (1937), 250. See also M. L. Mandelshtam, 1905 god v politicheskikh protsessakh: Zapiski zashchitnika [The year 1905 in political trials: Notes of a defense counsel] (Moscow: Izdatelstvo polikatorzhan, 1931), 360–63.

56.  Maklakov, Vtoraia Gosudarstvennaia Duma, 316.

57.  Pipes, Struve, 65.

58.  Ascher, The Revolution of 1905, 2:353–55.

59.  V. A. Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii (New York: Chekhov Publishing House [Izdatelstvo imeni Chekhova], 1954), 362.

60.  See A. Ia. Avrekh, Stolypin i Tretia Duma [Stolypin and the Third Duma] (Moscow: Izdatelstvo Nauka, 1968), 85–86; GDSO, Third Duma, 5th Sess., pt. 1, Meeting 10, October 29, 1911, cols. 818–20.

61.  V. Maklakov, “Zakonnost v Russkoi zhizni” [The Rule of law in Russian life], Vestnik Evropy, May 1909 [Public lecture delivered March 17, 1909], 238, 259–63.

62.  See Anthony Kroner, The Debate between Miliukov and Maklakov on the Chances for Russian Liberalism (Amsterdam, 1998), 110–11; Anthony Kroner, “The Debate between Miliukov and Maklakov on the Chances for Russian Liberalism,” Revolutionary Russia 7, no. 2 (1994): 239, 250 (citing Vestnik Partii Narodnoi Svobody, no. 1 [January 4, 1907], 48); Maklakov, “Sredi izbiratelnii” [Among the voters], Russkie Vedomosti [Russian news], March 26, 1906, 2; Maklakov, “Gde vykhod” [Where is there a way out?], Russkie Vedomosti, May 20, 1906, 2; Maklakov, “Zakoldovannyi krug” [A vicious circle], Russkie Vedomosti, August 27, 1906, 3.

63.  V. A. Maklakov, Pervaia Gosudarstvennaia Duma [The First State Duma] (Moscow: Tsentrpoligraf, 2006), 94–95.

64.  Tyrkova-Williams Diary and Letters, 282 (entry for September 29, 1950).

65.  See Stephen F. Williams, “A Kadet’s Critique of the Kadet Party: Vasily Maklakov,” Revolutionary Russia 23 (2010), 29, 52–57.

66.  P. N. Miliukov, “V. A. Maklakov mezhdu ‘obshchestvennostiu i vlastiu, II,’” [V. A. Maklakov between society and the state, II] Poslednie Novosti [Recent news], May 30, 1937, col. 5.

67.  P. N. Miliukov, “‘Sovremennye Zapiski,’ kn. 56,” [“Contemporary notes,” vol. 56] Poslednie Novosti [Recent news], July 16, 1939, col. 5; “Liberalizm, Radikalizm i Revolutsiia,” in Sovremennye Zapiski (1935), 285, 312–13; “V. A. Maklakov mezhdu ‘obshchestvennostiu i vlastiu, II,’” in Poslednie Novosti [Recent news], May 30, 1937, col. 3.

68.  P. N. Miliukov, “V. A. Maklakov o knige prof. Pares,” [V. A. Maklakov on Prof. Pares’s book] Poslednie Novosti [Recent news], July 16, 1939, col. 3.

69.  See Yuval Levin, The Great Debate: Edmund Burke, Thomas Paine, and the Birth of Right and Left (New York: Basic Books, 2013).

      CHAPTER 8: THE THIRD AND FOURTH DUMAS AND MAKLAKOV’S FIGHT AGAINST GOVERNMENT ARBITRARINESS

1.    GDSO, Third Duma, 5th Sess., pt. 2, February 29, 1912, col. 3420. See also Bakhmetev-Maklakov Correspondence, 1:458 (Maklakov to Bakhmetev, August 30, 1921).

2.    Abraham Ascher, P. A. Stolypin: The Search for Stability in Late Imperial Russia (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2001), 210–11; Ben-Cion Pinchuk, The Octobrists in the Third Duma, 1907–1912 (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1974), 31–34. C. Jay Smith, “The Russian Third Duma: An Analytical Profile,” Russian Review, 17, no. 3 (July 1958), 201–10. As Ascher notes, the party classifications are uncertain because of the deputies’ relatively frequent party switching. Ascher, P. A. Stolypin, 420n5.

3.    Pinchuk, The Octobrists in the Third Duma, 42–43; V. A. Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii (New York: Chekhov Publishing House [Izdatelstvo imeni Chekhova], 1954), 384–86.

4.    V. A. Maklakov, “L’Étape Actuelle du Bolshevisme,” Mercure de France, May 1, 1922, 577, 606–7 (regarding Soviet talk of independent courts in the 1920s as meaningless until the peasants, whom he regarded as the country’s sole productive force, acquired political power); see also Matthew Stephenson, “‘When the Devil Turns . . .’: The Political Foundations of Independent Judicial Review,” Journal of Legal Studies 32 (2003), 59.

5.    GDSO, Third Duma, 1st Sess., Prilozheniia, Item No. 13, 39–41 (reciting indictment).

6.    Ibid., Item No. 69, 277–80 (reciting indictment).

7.    GDSO, Third Duma, 1st Sess., pt. 3, May 19, 1908, cols. 954–56.

8.    See Article 19 of the Statute Establishing the Duma (Uchrezhdenie Gosudarstvennoi Dumy), cross-referencing Article 7 of the Statute on Elections to the Duma (Polozhenie o vyborakh v Gosudarstvenuiu Dumu), August 6, 1905. (Article 7 became Article 10 of the statute as amended by the Act of June 3, 1907. See GDSO, Third Duma, 2nd Sess., Prilozheniia, Item No. 80, 1.)

9.    GDSO, Third Duma, 2nd Sess., pt. 4, April 27, 1909, cols. 49–52, 54–56, 58–59.

10.  Ibid., col. 111 (Koliubakin); col. 126 (Kosorotov).

11.  See generally Jonathan W. Daly, “On the Significance of Emergency Legislation in Late Imperial Russia,” Slavic Review 54, no. 3 (1995), 602, 605.

12.  GDSO, Third Duma, 1st Sess., pt. 2, April 29, 1908, col. 2390.

13.  Richard J. Robbins, The Tsar’s Viceroys (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1987).

14.  GDSO, Third Duma, 1st Sess., pt. 2, April 29, 1908, col. 2397.

15.  Ibid., col. 2401.

16.  Ibid.; Third Duma, 2nd Sess., pt. 4, May 12, 1909, col. 1096.

17.  Ibid., Third Duma, 1st Sess., pt. 2, April 29, 1908, cols. 2406–2407.

18.  GDSO, Third Duma, 2nd Sess., pt. 1, October 15, 1908, cols. 22–24. See also ibid., 3rd Sess., pt. 2, February 18, 1910, col. 1779 (referring to police barring a deputy from reporting to his voters despite March 4 rules). Compare ibid. (suggesting that the March 4 rules assure freedom for unions) with Third Duma, 4th Sess., December 1, 1910, col. 2359 (arguing that all the government needs for its war on unions is the March 4 rules). And see Geoffrey A. Hosking, “P. A. Stolypin and the Octobrist Party,” Slavonic and East European Review 47, no. 108 (January 1969), 137, 150–51 (discussing Octobrist use of interpellations to shed light on government violations of March 4 rules).

19.  GDSO, Third Duma, 1st Sess., pt. 2, April 29, 1908, cols. 2402–2406.

20.  Ibid., 5th Sess., pt. 1, November 18, 1911, cols. 2150–51.

21.  Ibid., 3rd Sess., pt. 4, April 28, 1910, cols. 204–5. See also V. Maklakov, “III Sessiia Gosudarstvennoi Dumy” [The third session of (the Third) State Duma], Russkaia Mysl [Russian thought] (February 1911), 114.

22.  GDSO, Third Duma, 1st Sess., pt. 2, April 29, 1908, cols. 2395–97; ibid., 2nd Sess., pt. 4, February 13, 1909, cols. 1494–96; GDSO, Fourth Duma, 1st Sess., pt. 1, March 13, 1913, cols. 2113–14.

23.  GDSO, Third Duma, 1st Sess., pt. 1, February 15, 1908, cols. 1962–63, 1966.

24.  GDSO, Third Duma, 2nd Sess., pt. 4, February 13, 1909, cols. 1486–87.

25.  GDSO, Third Duma, 4th Sess., pt. 1, December 1, 1910, cols. 2365–66.

26.  GDSO, Fourth Duma, 1st Sess., pt. 3, May 27, 1913, col. 114. See also ibid., Third Duma, 2nd Sess., pt. 4, February 13, 1909, col. 1494.

27.  GDSO, Third Duma, 1st Sess., pt. 1, February 15, 1908, col. 1969.

28.  Ibid., 3rd Sess., pt. 4, April 28, 1910, col. 210.

29.  Hugh Seton-Watson, The Decline of Imperial Russia, 1855–1914 (New York: Frederick A. Praeger, 1952), 269–71; Bernard Pares, The Fall of the Russian Monarchy: A Study of the Evidence (New York, 1939), 143; Dominic Lieven, Nicholas II: Twilight of the Empire (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1993), 183.

30.  See, e.g., GDSO, Fourth Duma, 1st Sess., pt. 1, March 8, 1913, cols. 2106–19.

31.  Ascher, P. A. Stolypin, 334–35; A. Ia. Avrekh, P. A. Stolypin i Sudby Reform [P. A. Stolypin and the fate of reform] (Moscow: Izdatelstvo politicheskoi literatury, 1991), 160.

32.  Maklakov, La Chute, 19.

33.  GDSO, Third Duma, 4th Sess., pt. 3, April 27, 1911, col. 2873.

34.  Ibid., cols. 2874, 2878, 2880.

35.  Ibid., cols. 2857–59. See also Ascher, P. A. Stolypin, 359–60.

36.  GDSO, Third Duma, 4th Sess., pt. 3, April 27, 1911, cols. 2879–80. See chapter 5 for a discussion of Maklakov’s use of the argument after the revolution.

37.  The reference to government agents generating revolution echoes a common Maklakov theme—that government activity, especially its use of agents provocateurs, was what kept the embers of revolutionary activity from dying out. See, for example, GDSO, Third Duma, 1st Sess., pt. 1, February 15, 1908, col. 1967. The “precedent” referred to is presumably one of imperial inability to keep premiers and to keep working in harmony with them.

38.  GDSO, Third Duma, 4th Sess., pt. 3, April 27, 1911, col. 2887.

39.  Ascher, P. A. Stolypin, 360.

40.  Since the exchange over the field courts martial, there had been a clash on November 16, 1907, over the government’s priorities as between repression and reform and Stolypin’s hint of possible future curtailments of judicial independence. See chapter 11; GDSO, Third Duma, 1st Sess., pt. 1, November 16, 1907, cols. 307–12 (Stolypin); cols. 343–48 (Maklakov); cols. 348–54 (Stolypin).

41.  Georgii Adamovich, Vasilii Alekseevich Maklakov: Politik, Iurist, Chelovek [Vasily Alekseevich Maklakov: Politician, jurist, human being] (Paris, 1959), 182n*.

      CHAPTER 9: RELIGIOUS LIBERTY

1.    GDSO, Third Duma, 2nd Sess., pt. 4, May 12, 1909, col. 1006 (explanation of Karaulov, reporter for the committee on Old Believers issues).

2.    Ibid., cols. 1006–10. A related but less developed argument occurred on a bill allowing members of the Orthodox Church to leave the church freely, without creating conflicts between the church’s and the state’s view of their status. The amendment Maklakov supported—entitling a person exiting the faith to automatic government recognition of the exit—was included in the final bill, but, as with the Old Believer provision discussed below, the Duma failed to reach agreement with the State Council. See GDSO, Third Duma, 2nd Sess., pt. 4, May 22, 1909, cols. 1780–86; Ben-Cion Pinchuk, The Octobrists in the Third Duma, 1907–1912 (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1974), 87–92; Geoffrey A. Hosking, The Russian Constitutional Experiment: Government and Duma, 1907–1914 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973), 179; J. S. Curtiss, Church and State in Russia (New York: Columbia University Press, 1965), 325–26.

3.    GDSO, Third Duma, 2nd Sess., pt. 4, May 12, 1909, cols. 1089–90, 1094.

4.    Ibid., col. 1091.

5.    Ibid., col. 1093.

6.    Ibid., cols. 1404, 1606.

7.    Ibid., cols. 1094–98.

8.    GDSO, Third Duma, 4th Sess., pt. 1, October 20, 1910, cols. 131, 146–47; ibid., pt. 2, February 25, 1911, col. 2887 (Duma informed of reconciliation committee’s results). See also Hosking, The Russian Constitutional Experiment, 179; Curtiss, Church and State in Russia, 322–26.

9.    See Robert Geraci, “Pragmatism and Prejudice: Revisiting the Origin of the Pale of Settlement and Its Historiography,” unpublished manuscript, used with permission (reviewing the explanations offered over the centures and arguing that prior treatments have understated the role of pure anti-Semitism and crude stereotypes of Jewish behavior).

10.  GDSO, Third Duma, 4th Sess., pt. 2, February 9, 1911, cols. 1548–49.

11.  Ibid., col. 1547.

12.  For broader arguments about reactions to exceptionally hard-working minorities, see Thomas Sowell, Migrations and Cultures: A World View (New York: Basic Books, 1996).

13.  GDSO, Third Duma, 4th Sess., pt. 2, February 9, 1911, cols. 1550–51.

14.  Ibid., cols. 1551–52.

15.  Ibid., col. 1553.

16.  Maklakov used the term gosudarstvennost, a term that defies an exact and simple translation into English.

17.  On August 10, 1789, the Abbé Sieyès said in the French National assembly, at the close of a speech defending the dîme (a tax on harvests collected for the clergy), that the French should not do things that will make the rest of Europe say, “Ils veulent être libres et ils ne savent pas être justes!”; see http://vdaucourt.free.fr/Mothisto/Sieyes1/Sieyes1.htm.

18.  GDSO, Third Duma, 4th Sess., pt. 2, February 9, 1911, cols. 1554–55.

19.  Ibid., cols. 1602, 1607 (deadline vote), 1609–14. Alexander Orbach, “The Jewish People’s Group and Jewish Politics in Tsarist Russia, 1905–1914,” Modern Judaism 10, no. 1 (February 1990), 1, 8, incorrectly says the 208–138 vote embodied the idea of no time limit on the committee; in the end, of course, Duma inaction led to that result.

20.  GDSO, Third Duma, 4th Sess., pt. 2, March 30, 1911, col. 1924.

21.  Edmund Levin, A Child of Christian Blood: Murder and Conspiracy in Tsarist Russia: The Beilis Blood Libel (New York: Schocken Books, 2014), 12.

22.  A. S. Tager, The Decay of Czarism: The Beilis Trial (Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society of America, 1935), 39–41.

23.  Levin, A Child of Christian Blood, 230, 278.

24.  See Charles A. Ruud and Sergei Stepanov, Fontanka 16: The Tsars’ Secret Police (Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 1999), 265–69, 271; Tager, The Decay of Czarism, 176–78.

25.  Levin, A Child of Christian Blood, 63n24; Jacob Langer, Corruption and Counterrevolution: The Rise and Fall of the Black Hundred (PhD thesis, Duke University, 2007), 138; Padenie tsarskogo rezhima, 3:378–79 (May 15, 1917, testimony of S. P. Beletskii, director of the police).

26.  Delo Beilisa, Stenograficheskii otchet [The Beilis affair, Stenographic record] (Kiev: Pechatniia S. P. Iakovleva, 1913) 3:123–55.

27.  Levin, A Child of Christian Blood, 205, 288.

28.  Ibid., 284.

29.  “Dela istorii” [A matter of history], in Novoe Russkoe Slovo [New Russian word] (August 11, 1957), 3.

30.  Vasily Maklakov, “Spasitelnoe predosterezhenie: smysl dela Beilisa” [A Saving lesson: The meaning of the Beilis case], Russkaia Mysl [Russian thought], no. 11 (November 1913), 135–43.

31.  Langer, Corruption and Counterrevolution, 91–96, 138.

32.  Hans Rogger, “The Beilis Case,” Slavic Review 25, no. 4 (December 1966), 615, 626, 628.

33.  Ibid., 620.

34.  V. A. Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii (New York: Chekhov Publishing House [Izdatelstvo imeni Chekhova], 1954), 258–60.

35.  Levin, A Child of Christian Blood, 304.

36.  See Oleg Budnitskii, “The Russian Ambassador in Paris on the Whites and the Jews,” Jews in Eastern Europe, no. 3(28) (1995), 55 (“it would be incorrect to conclude that Maklakov was a Judeophile”).

37.  Spor o Rossii: V. A. Maklakov i V. V. Shulgin, Perepiska, 1919–1939 [Debate about Russia: V. A. Maklakov and V. V. Shulgin, correspondence, 1919–1939], ed. and introduction by Oleg Budnitskii (Moscow: ROSSPEN, 2012), 370–71 (Maklakov letter of December 23, 1929).

38.  Tyrkova-Williams Diary and Letters, 162.

39.  GDSO, Third Duma, 4th Sess., pt. 2, February 9, 1911, cols. 1544–46; A. Ia. Avrekh, Stolypin i Tretia Duma [Stolypin and the Third Duma] (Moscow: Nauka, 1968), 42.

40.  Michael F. Hamm, “Liberalism and the Jewish Question: The Progressive Bloc,” Russian Review 31, no. 2 (April 1972), 165–69.

41.  GDSO, Fourth Duma, 4th Sess., February 11, 1916, cols. 1467–68.

42.  Sezdy i konferentsii, 3:89–92 (June 7, 1915). See also O. Budnitskii, “V. A. Maklakov i evreiskoi vopros” [V. A. Maklakov and the Jewish question], Vestnik Evreiskogo universiteta [Bulletin of the Jewish University] no. 1(19) (1999), 42–94 (arriving at substantially similar conclusions).

      CHAPTER 10: NATIONAL MINORITIES

1.    V. Maklakov, “III Sessiia Gosudarstvennoi Dumy” [The third session of (the Third) State Duma], Russkaia Mysl [Russian thought] (February 1911), 96–125.

2.    Ibid., 119.

3.    Ibid., 119–20.

4.    V. A. Maklakov, “F. I. Rodichev i A. R. Lednitskii,” Novyi Zhurnal, no. 16 (1947), 246; V. A. Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost na zakate staroi Rossii (Vospominaniia sovremenika) [State and society in the twilight of old Russia (Recollections of a contemporary)] (Paris: Izdanie zhurnala “Illustrirovanaia Rossiia,” 1936), 362–64.

5.    Maklakov, “F. I. Rodichev i A. R. Lednitskii,” 247.

6.    Abraham Ascher, P. A. Stolypin: The Search for Stability in Late Imperial Russia (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2001), 331–36.

7.    Maklakov, “III Sessiia Gosudarstvennoi Dumy,” 123.

8.    Ibid., 123–24.

9.    GDSO, Third Duma, 5th Sess., pt. 2, January 20, 1912, cols. 643–46.

10.  Ibid., cols. 647–52.

11.  Ibid., cols. 652–53.

12.  Ibid., cols. 653–55.

13.  Ibid., col. 656.

14.  Ibid., col. 658; GDSO, Third Duma, 5th Sess., pt. 4, col. 396.

15.  GDSO, Fourth Duma, 4th Sess., pt. 1, February 11, 1916, col. 1465.

16.  Joshua A. Sanborn, Imperial Apocalypse: The Great War and the Destruction of the Russian Empire (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014), 58 n.147.

17.  Vaclav Lednitskii, “Vokrug V. A. Maklakova (lichnye vospominaniia)” [Around V. A. Maklakov (personal reminiscences)], Novyi Zhurnal, no. 56 (March 1959), 222, 243–44. The author was the son of Alexander Lednitskii.

18.  GDSO, Third Duma, 3rd Sess., pt. 4, May 22, 1910, cols. 2128–30.

19.  See Geoffrey A. Hosking, The Russian Constitutional Experiment: Government and Duma, 1907–1914 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973), 106–11.

20.  Ibid., 111–12.

21.  GDSO, Third Duma, 3rd Sess., pt. 4, May 22, 1910, cols. 2133–35, 2142, 2145.

22.  Ibid., cols. 2136–38, 2144–46.

23.  Ibid., cols. 2165–67 (A. A. Motovilov, nationalist); cols. 2201–2204 (V. V. Tenishev, Octobrist); cols. 2370–71 (Markov). See also Ma klakov’s treatment of the issue in “III Sessiia Gosudarstvennoi Dumy,” 120–22.

24.  GDSO, Third Duma, 3rd Sess., pt. 4, May 28, 1910, col. 2582; Hosking, The Russian Constitutional Experiment, 112, 116.

25.  Sezdy i konferentsii, 3:96, 107–9, 113; Bakhmetev-Maklakov Correspondence, 1:206 (Maklakov to Bakhmetev, May 6, 1920).

      CHAPTER 11: JUDICIAL REFORM, CITIZEN REMEDIES

1.    GDSO, Third Duma, 5th Sess., pt. 4, May 2, 1912, cols. 326–27.

2.    Ibid., 2nd Sess., pt. 4, February 13, 1909, col. 1493; 3rd Sess., pt. 1, November 13, 1909, col. 1877.

3.    GDSO, Fourth Duma, 2nd Sess., pt. 4, May 12, 1914, cols. 491, 495; Edmund Levin, A Child of Christian Blood: Murder and Conspiracy in Tsarist Russia: The Beilis Blood Libel (New York: Schocken Books, 2014), 184–85.

4.    GDSO, Third Duma, 5th Sess., pt. 4, May 2, 1912, col. 319. No part of the Senate was a legislature; its first and cassation departments were judicial bodies (and are discussed later in this chapter).

5.    Padenie tsarskogo rezhima, 2:364, 365–66. An 1885 statute empowered the minister of justice to demand explanations of a judge for his actions and to issue instructions relating to future or even completed cases. William G. Wagner, “Tsarist Legal Policies at the End of the Nineteenth Century: A Study in Inconsistencies,” Slavonic and East European Review 54, no. 3 (July 1976), 371, 375. While the statute uses language broadly authorizing issuance of instructions, the occasions triggering the authority are an undue accumulation of cases, slowness, a halt in the court’s activity, or deviation from legal order. Polnoe Sobranie Zakonov [Complete collection of laws], 3rd series, law of May 20, 1885, no. 2959. As the first three occasions clearly relate to the mechanics of the judicial process rather than to its substance, I think even the last phrase should be understood as equally limited. The statute seems not to have been seized upon to justify ministerial efforts to control judicial outcomes.

6.    GDSO, Third Duma, 1st Sess., pt. 1, November 16, 1907, col. 308.

7.    Ibid., col. 347.

8.    Ibid., cols. 345–46. See also Maklakov’s assault on Stolypin’s hint at express curtailment of judicial tenure at GDSO, Third Duma, 2nd Sess., pt. 2, February 13, 1909, cols. 1485, 1493.

9.    GDSO, Fourth Duma, 1st Sess., pt. 3, May 27, 1913, col. 120.

10.  Ibid., 2nd Sess., pt. 2, February 18, 1914, col. 813.

11.  Ibid., col. 824.

12.  Dumas Malone, Jefferson and His Time, vol. 5, Jefferson the President: The Second Term, 1805–1809 (1974), 305–6. See also William Rehnquist, “Jefferson and His Contemporaries,” Journal of Law and Politics 9 (1993), 595, 605.

13.  Padenie tsarskogo rezhima, 2:342 (April 24, 1917, testimony of Shcheglovitov).

14.  GDSO, Third Duma, 5th Sess., pt. 4, May 2, 1912, col. 331.

15.  GDSO, Fourth Duma, 2nd Sess., pt. 2, February 18, 1914, cols. 830–32.

16.  Ibid., col. 831. Note that the judges of the first department did not have tenure. Natasha Assa, “How Arbitrary Was Tsarist Administrative Justice? The Case of the Zemstvos Petitions to the Imperial Ruling Senate, 1866–1916,” Law and History Review 24 (Spring 2006), 1, 38.

17.  GDSO, Third Duma, 5th Sess., pt. 4, May 2, 1912, col. 316.

18.  Dominic Lieven, Russia’s Rulers under the Old Regime (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1989), 211.

19.  Jane Burbank, Russian Peasants Go to Court: Legal Culture in the Countryside, 1905–1917 (Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 2004), 54, 121; Vasilii Maklakov, “Local Justice in Russia,” Russian Review 2, no. 4 (1913), 126–47; Catherine Frierson, “Rural Justice in Public Opinion: The Volost’ Court Debate, 1861–1912,” Slavonic and East European Review 64, no. 4 (October 1986), 526, 529. Frierson, ibid., 527–28, points out that the model for the township court was a system devised in the late 1830s for state serfs, for whom the “lord” was the tsar, who was obviously not going to manage justice on his estates directly.

20.  See Thomas S. Pearson, “Russian Law and Rural Justice: Activity and Problems of the Russian Justices of the Peace, 1865–1889,” Jahrbücher für Geschichte Osteuropas (1984), 67–70.

21.  Ibid., 71.

22.  See Gareth Popkins, “Code versus Custom? Norms and Tactics in Peasant Volost Court Appeals, 1889–1917,” Russian Review 59, no. 3 (July 2000), 408–24; Gareth Popkins, “Peasant Experiences of the Late Tsarist State: District Congresses of Land Captains, Provincial Boards and the Legal Appeals Process, 1891–1917,” Slavonic and East European Review 78, no. 1 (January 2000), 90–114; Maklakov, “Local Justice in Russia,” 130; Frierson, “Rural Justice in Public Opinion,” 529.

23.  Burbank, Russian Peasants Go to Court, 166–73.

24.  Frierson, “Rural Justice in Public Opinion,” 539.

25.  GDSO, Third Duma, 1st Sess., Prilozheniia, Item No. 457, 770–96.

26.  GDSO, Third Duma, 3rd Sess., pt. 1, November 2, 1909, col. 1210; ibid., 1st Sess., Prilozheniia, Item No. 457, 777–78 (Art. 23).

27.  GDSO, Third Duma, 3rd Sess., pt. 3, March 27, 1910, cols. 2083–84.

28.  Ibid., 1st Sess., Prilozheniia, Item No. 457, 777–78. The Duma debated proposals for longer terms for judges, but rejected them in a voice vote. GDSO, Third Duma, 3rd Sess., pt. 2, cols. 286–308, January 25, 1910. Maklakov did not participate.

29.  GDSO, Third Duma, 3rd Sess., pt. 3, March 27, 1910, col. 2086.

30.  Ibid., cols. 2077–83.

31.  Ibid., cols. 2136–42.

32.  GDSO, Third Duma, 1st Sess., Prilozheniia, Item No. 457, p. 767 (Art. 17).

33.  Ibid., 3rd Sess., pt. 1, December 7, 1909, cols. 3113–20.

34.  GDSO, Third Duma, 1st Sess., Prilozheniia, Item No. 457, p. 717.

35.  See also Daly’s finding that the regime embarked in 1905 on deliberate enhancement of “leadership” in the provincial courts of appeal, doubtless measured by its own criteria. Jonathan W. Daly, “On the Significance of Emergency Legislation in Late Imperial Russia,” Slavic Review 54, no. 3 (1995), 624.

36.  GDSO, Third Duma, 3rd Sess., pt. 3, March 27, 1910, cols. 2067–68.

37.  Polnoe Sobranie Zakonov, 3rd ser., no. 37328, Prilozhenie I (published in part 2 of volume 32 of the Polnoe Sobranie Zakonov at 212–20 (accessible at http://www.nlr.ru/e-res/law_r/search.php?part=1969&regim=3), §§ 5–8, 29–40, 91–93. See also Maklakov, “Local Justice in Russia,” 141–43; Geoffrey A. Hosking, The Russian Constitutional Experiment: Government and Duma, 1907–1914 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973), 175–77.

38.  Polnoe Sobranie Zakonov, 3rd ser., no. 37328, 663; Maklakov, “Local Justice in Russia,” 142.

39.  Polnoe Sobranie Zakonov, 3rd ser., no. 37328, 667; Maklakov, “Local Justice in Russia,” 142–43.

40.  Polnoe Sobranie Zakonov, 3rd ser., no. 37328, 680, 683; Polnoe Sobranie Zakonov, 3rd ser., no. 37328, Prilozhenie I, § 54; Maklakov, “Local Justice in Russia,” 142.

41.  GDSO, Third Duma, 3rd Sess., pt. 2, February 1, 1910, col. 573.

42.  V. Maklakov, “III Sessiia Gosudarstvennoi Dumy” [The third session of (the Third) State Duma], Russkaia Mysl [Russian thought] (February 1911), 104.

43.  GDSO, Third Duma, 3rd Sess., pt. 1, November 2, 1909, cols. 1201–12; ibid., pt. 2, February 1, 1910, cols. 564–71.

44.  Burbank, Russian Peasants Go to Court, 245–57; Corinne Gaudin, Ruling Peasants (DeKalb: Northern Illinois University Press, 2007).

45.  Maklakov, “Local Justice in Russia,” 139, 141.

46.  GDSO, Third Duma, 3rd Sess., pt. 1, November 2, 1909, cols. 1201–1203.

47.  Assa, “How Arbitrary Was Tsarist Administrative Justice?,” 1, 38.

48.  GDSO, Fourth Duma, 2nd Sess., pt. 2, February 18, 1914, cols. 818–37.

49.  Ibid., cols. 823–24.

50.  Ibid., cols. 831, 833–34; Ekaterina A. Pravilova, Zakonnost i Prava Lichnosti: Administrativnaia Iustitsia v Rossii [Legality and individual rights: Administrative justice in imperial Russia] (St. Petersburg: Obrazovanie-Kultura, 2000), 182–83. Maklakov also argued that nothing supplied the Senate with the authority to set aside administrative acts that violated the law. GDSO, Fourth Duma, 2nd Sess., pt. 2, February 18, 1914, col. 833. That was not actually true, as Count Emmanuel Bennigsen pointed out later in the debate, without attempted refutation by Maklakov. Ibid., February 28, 1914, col. 1283.

51.  Ibid., February 18, 1914, col. 825.

52.  See, e.g., ibid., cols. 820, 825–26, 828, 829.

53.  Ibid., col. 827.

54.  Pravilova, Zakonnost i Prava Lichnosti, 182, 182–84.

55.  See GDSO, Fourth Duma, 2nd Sess., pt. 2, February 28, 1914, col. 1283 (Count Bennigsen).

56.  Ibid., February 28, 1914, cols. 1283–84, 1289–90; see also GDSO, Fourth Duma, 2nd Sess., Prilozheniia, Item No. 197 (committee report on Bill No. 813), 98–99 (text of Art. 75¹ as proposed by committee). Another amendment eliminated Senate review of ministerial and agency orders; Maklakov thought that review at publication would preempt review in a concrete case, thus likely neutering the latter review, which was potentially more valuable. GDSO, Fourth Duma, 2nd Sess., pt. 2, cols. 1287–88. Another amendment narrowed the Senate’s authority to deny publication to rules of Duma and State Council to cases of non-compliance with the statutes or administrative rules governing those bodies’ formal procedures, a change that Maklakov said followed from their not being subordinate to the Senate. Ibid., cols. 1279–80.

57.  B. Maklakoff, “La Russie de 1900 à 1917, Vers la Révolution: Le Dénouement,” Revue de Paris 5 (1924), 508, 512. This is the first of a series of three articles, all with the same title (except that the second and third bear the additional legend, “suite”).

58.  Maklakov, “III Sessiia Gosudarstvennoi Dumy,” 98–100.

59.  For an excellent general review, see Marc Szeftel, “Personal Inviolability in the Legislation of the Russian Absolute Monarchy,” American Slavic and East European Review 17, no. 1 (February 1958), 1–24.

60.  Pravilova, Zakonnost i Prava Lichnosti, 231–32.

61.  Ibid., 229; GDSO, Third Duma, 5th Sess., pt. 1, November 18, 1911, col. 2149.

62.  GDSO, Third Duma, 5th Sess., pt. 1, November 18, 1911, col. 2156; see also Szeftel, “Personal Inviolability in the Legislation of the Russian Absolute Monarchy,” 5–6; Pravilova, Zakonnost i Prava Lichnosti, 220–24; Richard Wortman, “Russian Monarchy and the Rule of Law: New Considerations of the Court Reform of 1864,” Kritika: Explorations in Russian and Eurasian History 6, no. 1 (Winter 2005), 154.

63.  GDSO, Third Duma, 5th Sess., pt. 1, November 18, 1911, col. 2156.

64.  Ibid., cols. 2159–60. See also GDSO, Third Duma, 4th Sess., Prilozheniia, Item No. 271, 19–20, pp. 71–74 (Art. 1096 as proposed by committee); GDSO, Third Duma, 5th Sess., pt. 1, November 18, 1911, col. 2296 (the Kadets’ proposed text).

65.  Ibid., November 19, 1911, cols. 2287–98; the vote is recorded at ibid., cols. 2296–97.

66.  Pravilova, Zakonnost i Prava Lichnosti, 224–25.

67.  GDSO, Third Duma, 5th Sess., pt. 1, November 22, 1911, cols. 2364–68. Under modern U.S. law officials are typically personally liable for violations of law—but only ones that a reasonable officer would have recognized as illegal at the time he acted. See Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (1982).

68.  GDSO, Third Duma, 5th Sess., pt. 1, November 22, 1911, cols. 2366–69.  See also Wortman, “Russian Monarchy and the Rule of Law,” 154. Pravilova points out additional problems, such as (1) the agencies’ ability, in cases where a private party seeks relief against an unlawful order, to drag matters out and keep the challenged order in place for years, (2) very broad concepts of official immunity, and (3) the likely inability to collect from relatively impecunious bureaucrats. Pravilova, Zakonnost i Prava Lichnosti, 56, 57–58. See also Szeftel, “Personal Inviolability in the Legislation of the Russian Absolute Monarchy,” 6 (explaining absence of any relief for unlawful arrest and obstructions to relief when the unlawfully arrested person is later acquitted). Maklakov returned to these issues on March 21, 1914. See GDSO, Fourth Duma, 2nd Sess., pt. 3, March 21, 1914, cols. 15–25, 63–77.

69.  GDSO, Third Duma, 5th Sess., pt. 1, November 22, 1911, col. 2387; Pravilova, Zakonnost i Prava Lichnosti, 230.

70.  D. C. B. Lieven, “The Security Police, Civil Rights, and the Fate of the Russian Empire, 1855–1917,” in Civil Rights in Imperial Russia, ed. Olga Crisp and Linda Edmondson (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989), 258–61.

      CHAPTER 12: PEASANT RIGHTS

1.    Bakhmetev-Maklakov Correspondence, 1:460 (Maklakov to Bakhmetev, August 30, 1921). The other great sin he identified in this passage was the monarchy’s fear of and hostility to industrial capital.

2.    V. A. Maklakov, Vtoraia Gosudarstvennaia Duma [The Second State Duma] (Moscow: Tsentrpoligraf, 2006), 171; V. A. Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii (New York: Chekhov Publishing House [Izdatelstvo imeni Chekhova], 1954), 395.

3.    For the many ways in which the reform fell short of actually establishing private ownership, see Stephen F. Williams, Liberal Reform in an Illiberal Regime: The Creation of Private Property in Russia, 1906–1915 (Stanford: Hoover Institution Press, 2006), 216–23, 243–48.

4.    Victor Leontovitsch, The History of Liberalism in Russia, translated by Parmen Leontovitsch, with a foreword by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 2012), 88.

5.    V. Maklakov, “III Sessiia Gosudarstvennoi Dumy” [The third session of (the Third) State Duma], Russkaia Mysl [Russian thought] (February 1911), 106–9.

6.    V. A. Maklakov, “Pereustroistvo krestianskago byta” [“Reconstruction of peasant life”], Vestnik grazhdanskovo prava [Bulletin of civil law], no. 8 (December 1916), 29–52; no. 1 (January 1917), 29–69.

7.    V. Maklakov, Rech na Sezd K-D [Speech to Kadet Conference] (Moscow, 1917). This is a separately printed pamphlet containing only his speech. It is unclear who published it; given its deviation from Kadet orthodoxy, it is surely not one of the pamphlets of Maklakov speeches that the party often published and circulated.

8.    Ingeborg Fleischhauer, “The Agrarian Program of the Russian Constitutional Democrats,” Cahiers du Monde russe et soviétique, no. 20(2), (1979), 4–5. Article VI of the Kadet proposal specified that the recipients of redistributed land would receive only a long-term right to use the property, with no right of sale, exchange or gift (“assignment”). GDSO, First Duma, Meeting 6, May 8, 1906, 250. A maverick Kadet, L. I. Petrazhitskii, made a carefully honed argument that this approach would prevent transactions that could be expected to benefit sellers and buyers alike, and indirectly the public interest, ibid., 451–58, an argument that the major Kadet speaker (Mikhail Gertsenshtein) seemed not to fully grasp, much less rebut, ibid., 465–71.

9.    George Tokmakoff, P. A. Stolypin and the Third Duma: An Appraisal of the Three Major Issues (Washington, DC: University Press of America, 1981), 34 and n.27 (citing GDSO, Third Duma, 1st Sess., pt. 1, November 16, 1907, cols. 343–48.

10.  See A. A. Kaufman, Agrarnyi vopros v Rossii [The Agrarian Question in Russia] (Moscow: Moskovskoe Nauchnoe Izdatelstvo, 1918), 221; Peter Toumanoff, “Some Effects of Land Tenure Reforms on Russian Agricultural Productivity, 1901–1913,” Economic Development and Cultural Change 32, no. 4 (July 1984), 861–72; and see the discussion in Williams, Liberal Reform in an Illiberal Regime, 102–3.

11.  Sezdy i konferentsii, 3:610.

12.  Ibid., 624. Rosenberg says that the conference adopted “the conservative position on almost every point,” but he refers to rejection of proposals such as one under which landowners would receive no compensation whatever. See William G. Rosenberg, Liberals in the Russian Revolution: The Constitutional Democratic Party, 1917–1921 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1974), 129.

13.  Basil Maklakov, “The Peasant Question and the Russian Revolution,” trans. Bernard Pares, Slavonic Review 2, no. 5 (December 1923), 244.

14.  Maklakov, La Chute, 49.

15.  Tyrkova-Williams Diary and Letters, 403 (letter of April 28, 1944).

16.  “Doklad po zakonoproektu ob otmene nekotorykh ogranichenii v pravakh selskikh obyvatelei i lits byvshikh podatnykh sostoianii” (Vysochaishii Ukaz 5 Oktiabr 1906 g.) [Report on a bill for repeal of certain limits on the rights of village inhabitants and persons of former taxed status (Imperial Decree of October 5, 1906)], GDSO, Fourth Duma, 4th Sess., Prilozheniia, Item No. 235 (hereafter cited as “Report”); GDSO, Fourth Duma, 4th Sess., Meeting 53, June 9, 1916, col. 5011.

17.  Bakhmetev-Maklakov Correspondence, 3:400 (Maklakov to Bakhmetev, February 23, 1928); Leo Tolstoy, Anna Karenina, trans. Richard Pevear and Larissa Volkhonsky (New York: Viking, 2001), part 8, chapter 16.

18.  See the Kollontai-Maklakov letters at http://ru-lib.3dn.ru/publ/kollontaj_aleksandra_mikhajlovna_pisma_k_v_a_maklakovu/1-1-0-460, letter no. 14. See chapter 3.

19.  GDSO, Fourth Duma, 4th Sess., Meeting 56, June 14, 1916, col. 5392. After reviewing the provisions on the Baltics, the Duma approved the bill as a whole. Ibid., Meeting 59, June 18, 1916, cols. 5665–68.

20.  Ibid., Meeting 51, June 3, 1916, col. 4816.

21.  Ibid., Meeting 55, June 13, 1916, cols. 5320–23.

22.  Ibid.; see also V. A. Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost na zakate staroi Rossii (Vospominaniia sovremenika) [State and society in the twilight of old Russia (Recollections of a contemporary)] (Paris: Izdanie zhurnala “Illustrirovanaia Rossiia,” 1936), 579–80, 587–88, 593–95; Maklakov, Vtoraia Gosudarstvennaia Duma, 172–75.

23.  Ivan Strakhovskii, Peasant Law and Institutions (Krestianskie prava i uchrezhdeniia) (St. Petersburg: Izdatelstvo Obshchestvennaia Polza, 1903).

24.  This was an exaggeration, to be sure. In 1848, at long last, for example, peasants received the right to acquire land on their own, i.e., non-allotment land, held in the conventional manner. Leontovitsch, The History of Liberalism in Russia, 88.

25.  Report, 11/1.

26.  Ibid.

27.  Ibid., 10/1–2.

28.  Report, 7/2.

29.  Ibid., 11/2.

30.  GDSO, Fourth Duma, 4th session, Meeting 51, June 3, 1916, col. 4775.

31.  Report, 12/1.

32.  Ibid., 12/2; see also Basil Maklakov, “The Peasant Question and the Russian Revolution,” 245–46.

33.  See Report, 35/2 (explaining role of the Senate’s 1904 judgment); ibid., 30 (text of Section XII, codifying the Senate decree and addressing the matter); ibid., 31 (text of Section XXII, allowing an official of village societies to refuse to perform in-kind obligations when his duties prevent his continuous presence in the village society).

34.  Report, 40/1–2, 47/1–48/2; GDSO, Fourth Duma, 4th Sess., June 9, 1916, col. 5007; ibid., June 14, 1916, col. 5375.

35.  Report, 13/1.

36.  Neil B. Weissman, Reform in Tsarist Russia: The State Bureaucracy and Local Government, 1900–1914 (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1981), 190–96, 202–4; Geoffrey A. Hosking, The Russian Constitutional Experiment: Government and Duma, 1907–1914 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973), 161–70; Don C. Rawson, Russian Rightists and the Revolution of 1905 (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995), 223; A. Ia. Avrekh, Tsarizm i IV Duma, 1912–1914 gg. [Tsarism and the Fourth Duma, 1912–1914] (Moscow: Izdaletsvo Nauka, 1981), 78.

37.  P. A. Pozhigailo, ed., P. A. Stolypin glazami sovremennikov [P. A. Stolypin through his contemporaries’ eyes] (Moscow: ROSSPEN, 2008), 640–41.

38.  GDSO, Fourth Duma, 4th Sess., June 9, 1916, col. 5073; ibid., June 18, 1916, cols. 5669–72.

39.  Ibid., June 3, 1916, col. 4769.

40.  Ibid., col. 4810.

41.  Ibid., June 9, 1916, col. 5011.

42.  Ibid., cols. 5014–15.

43.  Ibid., col. 4993.

44.  Ibid., col. 4996.

45.  GDSO, Fourth Duma, 4th Session, Meeting 53, June 9, 1916, cols. 5063–64.

46.  Code of Laws of the Russian Empire (Svod Zakonov Rossiikoi Imperii), vol. 14, section 205.

47.  See Alan Wood, “The Use and Abuse of Administrative Exile to Siberia,” Irish Slavonic Studies, no. 6 (1985), 65–81.

48.  Law on Termination of Permanent Exile and Restrictions on Temporary Exile Declared as a Sentence Pronounced by a Court or Community, in the Polnoe Sobranie Zakonov Rossiikoi Imperii, series 3 (1881–1913), vol. 20, Item 18839, at 758 (official publication), section II. See also Wood, “The Use and Abuse of Administrative Exile to Siberia.”

49.  GDSO, Fourth Duma, 4th session, Meeting 54, June 10, 1916, cols. 5135–36.

50.  Ibid., col. 5262.

51.  Ibid., cols. 5262–63.

52.  Ibid., cols. 5263–66.

53.  See Jonathan W. Daly, “On the Significance of Emergency Legislation in Late Imperial Russia,” Slavic Review 54, no. 3 (1995), 602–29 (saying that peasants “considered indispensable their right to subject ‘undesirables’ to administrative exile”).

54.  Maklakov, Vtoraia Gosudarstvennaia Duma, 175.

55.  GDSO, Fourth Duma, 4th Sess., June 3, 1916, cols. 4761, 4768, 4777.

56.  Ibid., June 9, 1916, cols. 5041–42.

57.  Ibid., col. 5043.

58.  Ibid.

59.  Ibid., col. 5012.

60.  Ibid., June 3, 1916, col. 4759 (Kerensky’s claim).

61.  Ibid., col. 4763.

62.  Ibid., June 9, 1916, cols. 5015, 5069–71.

63.  Ibid., June 3, 1916, col. 4774 (Kerensky); ibid., June 9, 1916, col. 5016 (Maklakov).

64.  Ibid., cols. 5016–18.

      CHAPTER 13: REFORMS AND REFORM: AN APPRAISAL

1.    V. Maklakov, “III Sessiia Gosudarstvennoi Dumy” [The third session of (the Third) State Duma], Russkaia Mysl [Russian thought] (February 1911), 96, 97.

2.    Ibid., 119–24.

3.    GDSO, Third Duma, 2nd Sess., pt. 1, December 10, 1908, col. 2487.

4.    Ibid.

5.    GDSO, Fourth Duma, 2nd Sess., pt. 4, May 12, 1914, col. 506.

6.    Ibid., cols. 506–7.

7.    V. A. Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost na zakate staroi Rossii (Vospominaniia sovremenika) [State and society in the twilight of old Russia (Recollections of a contemporary)] (Paris: Izdanie zhurnala “Illustrirovanaia Rossiia,” 1936), 14.

8.    Ibid., 28.

9.    Maklakov, La Chute, 64.

10.  Ibid.

11.  Bakhmetev-Maklakov Correspondence, 3:33 (Maklakov to Bakhmetev, July 4, 1923).

12.  V. A. Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii (New York: Chekhov Publishing House [Izdatelstvo imeni Chekhova], 1954), 366.

13.  See generally Wayne Dowler, Russia in 1913 (DeKalb: Northern Illinois University Press, 2012).

14.  Eric Lohr, “Patriotic Violence and the State: The Moscow Riots of May 1915,” Kritika 4, no. 3, n.s. (Summer 2003), 607–26; William C. Fuller, Jr., The Foe Within: Fantasies of Treason and the End of Imperial Russia (Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 2006).

      CHAPTER 14: NATIONAL LIBERALS

1.    D. N. Shipov, Vospominaniia i dumy o perezhitom [Memoirs and reflections on the past] (Moscow: ROSSPEN, 2007), 520–24; Geoffrey A. Hosking, The Russian Constitutional Experiment: Government and Duma, 1907–1914 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973), 224–25.

2.    V. Maklakov, Moskovskii Ezhenedelnik no. 42 (November 1, 1908), 6–13.

3.    D. C. B. Lieven, Russia and the Origins of the First World War (London: Macmillan, 1983), 125–26.

4.    Dominic Lieven, Russia’s Rulers under the Old Regime (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1989), 228–30.

5.    GDSO, Fourth Duma, 1st Sess., pt. 1, December 7, 1912, cols. 328–29. On the broad domestic aspects of the December 7 speech, see A. Ia. Avrekh, Tsarizm i IV Duma, 1912–1914 gg. [Tsarism and the Fourth Duma, 1912–1914] (Moscow: Izdaletsvo Nauka, 1981), 42–43.

6.    Russkie Vedomosti [Russian news], December 6, 1912, 3–4.

7.    Hosking, The Russian Constitutional Experiment, 233–38; Christopher Clark, The Sleepwalkers (New York: Harper, 2012), 264–65; Andrew Rossos, Russia and the Balkans (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1981), 112–13.

8.    Protokoly, 2:101 (A. S. Izgoev).

9.    Ibid., 106, 109 (October 22, 1912).

10.  See Valentin Valentinovich Shelokhaev, Ideologiia i politicheskaia organizatsiia rossiiskoi liberalnoi burzhuazii, 1907–1914 [The Ideology and political organization of the Russian liberal bourgeoisie, 1907–1914] (Moscow: Nauka, 1991), 179–93 for a review of the intra-party debates; Melissa Kirschke Stockdale, Paul Miliukov and the Quest for a Liberal Russia, 1880–1918 (Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1996), 212–20.

11.  Maklakov is presumably referring to Outer Manchuria, acquired by Russia pursuant to treaties with China in 1858 and 1860, and still Russian territory.

12.  Marina Aleksandrovna Ivanova, “Rol V. A. Maklakova v Obshchestvenno-politicheskoi zhizni Rossii” [The role of V. A. Maklakov in the social-political life of Russia] (PhD thesis, Rossiiskii Universitet Druzhby Narodov, 1997), 108, 218, nn. 56–57 (citing GIM, fond 31, delo 148, ll. 143, 149).

13.  Letter of Lucy Bresser to Maklakov, October 4, 1912 (n.s.), GIM, fond 31, delo 11, l. 54.

14.  See V. I. Lenin, Polnoe sobranie sochinenii [Complete collected works] (Moscow: Gosudarstvennoe Izdatelstvo Politicheskoi literatury, 1961), 22:245.

15.  Shelokhaev, Ideologiia, 179.

16.  Avrekh, Tsarizm i IV Duma, 220.

17.  Protokoly, 2:143.

18.  Ibid.

19.  Ibid., 143–44.

20.  Bakhmetev-Maklakov Correspondence, 1:461 (Maklakov to Bakhmetev, August 20, 1921).

21.  Protokoly, 2:146.

22.  Ibid., 147–48.

23.  Ibid., 153.

24.  Sezdy i konferentsii, 2:508–9, 565–66 (March 23–25, 1914); Protokoly, 2:153.

25.  Protokoly, 2:281–82.

26.  Stockdale, Paul Miliukov, 198–200; V. S. Dyakin, Burzhuaziya, dvoryanstvo i tsarizm v 1911–1914 gg.: Razlozhenie tretei-unskoi sistemy [The Bourgeoisie, the nobility and tsarism in 1911–1914: The Break-up of the June 3 system] (Leningrad: Nauka 1988), 218n130; Avrekh, Tsarizm i IV Duma, 211–13.

27.  Protokoly, 2:283.

28.  Sezdy i konferentsii, 2:405–9, 421–22, 427.

29.  Sezdy i konferentsii, 2:429–32.

30.  Sezdy i konferentsii, 2:441, 444.

31.  Shipov, Vospominaniia i dumy, 524–26.

32.  Shelokhaev, Ideologiia, 71–72.

33.  On the intra-Kadet battles over strategy, see generally Dyakin, Burzhuaziya, dvoryanstvo i tsarizm v 1911–1914 gg.

34.  Evgenii Efimovskii, “Odin iz Mogikan: Pamiati V. A. Maklakova” [One of the Mohicans: Memories of V. A. Maklakov], Vozrozhdenie 68 (1957), 122, 124.

35.  Dyakin, Burzhuaziya, dvoryanstvo i tsarizm v 1911–1914 gg., 205.

36.  Tyrkova-Williams Diary and Letters, 153 (diary, July 19, 1915).

37.  Ibid., 400 (letter to Maklakov, March 28, 1944); ibid., 167 (diary, February 6, 1916).

38.  Avrekh, Tsarizm i IV Duma, 220–21.

39.  Tyrkova-Williams Diary and Letters, 877–78 (Maklakov to Tyrkova-Williams, November 14, 1943). Maklakov put the last sentence into quotes because it is (with an immaterial variation) taken from a poem by N. A. Nekrasov, “Sasha”: “Delo vekov popravliat nelegko.”

      CHAPTER 15: WAR—AND THE MAD CHAUFFEUR

1.    Dominic Lieven, The End of Tsarist Russia (New York: Viking, 2014), 304–7, 324.

2.    Leopold Haimson’s 1964 and 1965 articles appeared to suggest a view that a revolutionary outcome such as that of October 1917 was inevitable regardless of the war, but his 2000 take on the subject was far more nuanced, stressing the proposition that the effect of the war was not to “conceive” but merely to “accelerate” polarization that was well under before the war. Leopold Haimson, “The Problem of Social Stability in Urban Russia, 1905–17, Part I,” Slavic Review 23 (1964), 619–42; Haimson, “The Problem of Social Stability in Urban Russia, 1905–17, Part II,” Slavic Review 24 (1965), 1–22; Haimson, “‘The Problem of Political and Social Stability in Urban Russia on the Eve of War and Revolution’ Revisited,” Slavic Review 59 (2000), 848–75.

3.    See, e.g., Bakhmetev-Maklakov Correspondence, 3:38 (Maklakov to Bakhmetev, September 25, 1923).

4.    Michael Melancon, The Lena Goldfields Massacre (College Station: Texas A&M University Press, 2006), 107.

5.    GDSO, Third Duma, 5th Sess., pt. 3, April 18, 1912, cols. 2757–73.

6.    Vladimir Kokovtsov, Out of My Past (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1935), 454–55.

7.    Lieven, The End of Tsarist Russia, 114–15, 294.

8.    Michael Cherniavsky, ed., Prologue to Revolution: Notes of A. N. Iakhontov on the Secret Meetings of the Council of Ministers, 1915 (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1967), 7.

9.    A. Ia. Avrekh, Tsarizm i IV Duma, 1912–1914 gg. [Tsarism and the Fourth Duma, 1912–1912] (Moscow: Izdaletsvo Nauka, 1981), 93. The “divine discontent” reference is a nod to Ralph Waldo Emerson.

10.  GDSO, Fourth Duma, 2nd Sess., pt. 4, May 12, 1914, col. 506.

11.  V. I. Burtsev, “Arest pri tsare i arest pri Lenine,” Novyi Zhurnal, no. 69 (1962), 170, 180–85, 192–93.

12.  Raymond Pearson, The Russian Moderates and the Crisis of Tsarism, 1914–1917 (New York: Barnes and Noble, 1978), 29–31; V. A. Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii (New York: Chekhov Publishing House [Izdatelstvo imeni Chekhova], 1954), 260.

13.  Norman Stone, The Eastern Front, 1914–1917 (London: Penguin, 1998), 122–93.

14.  Maklakov, La Chute, 66–67.

15.  Tsuyoshi Hasegawa, The February Revolution (Seattle and London: University of Washington Press, 1981), 28–29.

16.  GDSO, Fourth Duma, 4th Sess., pt. 1, August 1, 1915, cols. 291–94, 339–43; ibid., August 8, 1915, cols. 530–34.

17.  Ibid., August 28, 1915, cols. 1123–24.

18.  S. P. Melgunov, Na putiakh dvortsovomu perevorotu (zagovory pered revoliutsiei 1917 goda) [On the way to a palace coup (plots before the revolution of 1917)] (Paris: Librairie “La Source,” 1931), 39n*.

19.  Sezdy i konferentsii, 3:170 (Kokoshkin), 194–95 (party resolution); Hasegawa, The February Revolution, 29–30.

20.  Protokoly, 3:152 (August 19, 1915). See also Hasegawa, The February Revolution, 53–54.

21.  Tyrkova-Williams Diary and Letters, 883 (letter to Ariadne Tyrkova-Williams, January 8, 1944).

22.  Russkie Vedomosti [Russian news], September 27, 1915, 2, trans. by George Katkov, Russia 1917: The February Revolution (New York: Harper and Row, 1967), 178–79.

23.  Pearson, The Russian Moderates, 71.

24.  Katkov, Russia 1917, 179. See also Melgunov, Na putiakh dvortsovomu perevorotu, 93.

25.  Tyrkova-Williams Diary and Letters, 399 (letter dated March 16, 1944).

26.  Hasegawa, The February Revolution, 34–39; Bernard Pares, The Fall of the Russian Monarchy: A Study of the Evidence (New York, 1939), 265.

27.  Pearson, The Russian Moderates, 136–37.

28.  Semion Lyandres, “Progressive Bloc Politics on the Eve of the Revolution: Revisiting P. N. Miliukov’s ‘Stupidity or Treason’ Speech of November 1, 1916,” Russian History/Histoire Russe 31, no. 4 (Winter 2004), 447–64; see also Hasegawa, The February Revolution, 54.

29.  V. A. Maklakov, “Libo my, libo oni” [We or they], in V. A. Maklakov, Rechi: Sudebniia, Dumskiia i Publichniia Lektsii, 1904–1926 [V. A. Maklakov, Speeches: Judicial, Duma and public lectures, 1904–1926] (Paris: Izdanie Iubileinogo Komiteta, 1869–1949), 205–12.

30.  A. Ia. Avrekh, Raspad treteiiuskoi sistemy [The Fall of the June 3 System] (Moscow: Nauka, 1985), 119–20.

31.  Martin Gilbert, The First World War (New York: Holt Paperbacks, 2004), 306.

32.  V. Maklakov, “Zakonnost v Russkoi zhizni” (“The Rule of law in Russian life”), Vestnik Evropy (May 1909), 238, 260–61.

33.  Melgunov, Na putiakh dvortsovomu perevorotu, 195.

34.  GARF, fond 63, opis 47, delo 511(1), ll. 31–32. F. A. Gaida states that the person approached was Duma Chairman Rodzianko, but the letter does not say that, and Gaida offers no source for the proposition. See Gaida, Liberalnaia oppozitsiia na putiakh vlasti (1914–vesna 1917 g.) [The liberal opposition on the path to power (1914–Spring 1917)] (Moscow: ROSSPEN, 2003), 259; see also Marina Aleksandrovna Ivanova, “Rol V. A. Maklakova v Obshchestvenno-politicheskoi zhizni Rossii” [The role of V. A. Maklakov in the social-political life of Russia] (PhD thesis, Rossiiskii Universitet Druzhby Narodov, 1997), 142 (discussing another apparently unsubstantiated claim that Rodzianko was the subject).

35.  See Hasegawa, The February Revolution, 173–74, 190–97.

      CHAPTER 16: THE KILLING OF RASPUTIN

1.    V. A. Maklakov, “Delo ob ubiistve Rasputina: V. A. Maklakov o svoem uchastii v zagovore” [The Rasputin murder case: V. A. Maklakov on his role in the plot], Illiustrirovannia Rossiia, no. 12 (358) (March 19, 1932), 1–6.

2.    Prince Felix Youssoupoff, Rasputin: His Malignant Influence and His Assassination, trans. Oswald Rayner (London: Jonathan Cape, 1934 [reissue of 1927 edition]); Vladimir Mitrofanovich Purishkevich, The Murder of Rasputin, ed. Michael E. Shaw, trans. Bella Costello, with a reprint of Maklakov’s introduction to the original (Ann Arbor: Ardis, 1985).

3.    See Youssoupoff, Rasputin, 128 (receiving the truncheon), 181 (battering the body).

4.    Maklakov, Introduction, in Purishkevich, The Murder of Rasputin, 60.

5.    Ronald C. Moe, Prelude to the Revolution: The Murder of Rasputin (Chula Vista, CA: Aventine Press, 2011), 570; Edmund Levin, A Child of Christian Blood: Murder and Conspiracy in Tsarist Russia: The Beilis Blood Libel (New York: Schocken Books, 2014), 263–66.

6.    Maurice Paléologue, An Ambassador’s Memoirs (New York: Octagon, 1972), 3:188–89.

CHAPTER 17: FEBRUARY 1917

1.    Tsuyoshi Hasegawa, The February Revolution (Seattle and London: University of Washington Press, 1981), 229. See generally ibid., 215–31 (events of February 23).

2.    Ibid., 310.

3.    Ibid., 227.

4.    V. Maklakov, “Kanun revoliutsii” [The eve of the revolution], Novyi Zhurnal, no. 14 (1946), 306, 308–9.

5.    Ibid., 309–10. See also Hasegawa, The February Revolution, 255–56.

6.    Ibid., 265.

7.    Vasily Shulgin, Dni * 1920 [Days * 1920] (Moscow: Sovremenika, 1989), 167–71; Maklakov, “Kanun revoliutsii,” 310.

8.    Ibid. Paléologue confirms the encounter, though not the specific comment. He emphasizes that he had said to Maklakov that if a crisis should be precipitated he [Maklakov] would undoubtedly “be called on to play a part. In that case, let me beg of you not to forget the fundamental obligations the war has laid on Russia.” Maklakov replied, “You can count on me.” Maurice Paléologue, An Ambassador’s Memoirs (New York: Octagon, 1972), 3:216–17.

9.    Compare Maklakov, “Kanun revoliutsii,” 310, with Hasegawa, The February Revolution, 274 (naming Savich, Balashov, and Dmitriukov but not Tereshchenko).

10.  Maklakov, “Kanun revoliutsii,” 310.

11.  Ibid., 310–11.

12.  Ibid., 311–12.

13.  Maklakov’s account (ibid., 312) appears to mix up dates. Rodzianko on Saturday the 25th spontaneously adjourned the Duma to the 27th (Hasegawa, The February Revolution, 256), but Maklakov specifies Sunday the 26th for the adjournment order.

14.  Hasegawa, The February Revolution, 268–74.

15.  Ibid., 276–80; Maklakov, “Kanun revoliutsii,” 312–13; Semion Lyandres, The Fall of Tsarism: Untold Stories of the February 1917 Revolution (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013), 90, 98–99.

16.  Maklakov, “Kanun revoliutsii,” 313–14.

17.  The “Senioren Konvent” or “Sovet stareishin.”

18.  Its “Uchrezhdenie.”

19.  Hasegawa, The February Revolution, 276, 349–53; Andrei Borisovich Nikolaev, Gosudarstvennaia duma v Fevral’skoi revoliutsii: Ocherki istorii [The State Duma in the February Revolution: Historical notes] (Riazan: Izdatel P. A. Tribunskii, 2002), 27–31; Lyandres, The Fall of Tsarism, 91–92, 99.

20.  Melissa Kirschke Stockdale, Paul Miliukov and the Quest for a Liberal Russia, 1880–1918 (Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1996), 241.

21.  Leonard Schapiro, The Russian Revolutions of 1917: The Origins of Modern Communism (New York: Basic Books, 1984), 45. See also Hasegawa, The February Revolution, 352–53 (speaking of the creation of the Duma Committee as “noncommittal”).

22.  Hasegawa, The February Revolution, 367–69; Nikolaev, Gosudarstvennaia duma v Fevralskoi revoliutsii, 77; Schapiro, The Russian Revolutions of 1917, 45–46; N. G. Dumova, Kadetskaia partiia v period pervoi mirovoi voiny i Fevralskoi revolutsii [The Kadet party in the period of the First World War and the February Revolution] (Moscow: Nauka, 1988), 96.  Nikolaev says that the Duma Committee also appointed Kerensky a commissar, but acknowledges that no such appointment is listed in the records and reports no activity by Kerensky as commissar. Nikolaev, Gosudarstvennaia duma v Fevral’skoi revoliutsii, 77–78.

23.  Ibid., 110.

24.  Ibid., 77–78.

25.  V. A. Maklakov, Iz Vospominanii (New York: Chekhov Publishing House [Izdatelstvo imeni Chekhova], 1954), 259–61; Nikolaev, Gosudarstvennaia duma v Fevralskoi revoliutsii, 78, 85; B. Maklakoff, “La Russie de 1900 à 1917, Vers la Révolution: Le Dénouement,” Revue de Paris 5 (1924), 511–12. Maklakov mentions only Adzhemov as a fellow commissar; perhaps their shared Kadet background made them the most aggressive.

26.  See, e.g., Sarah Badcock, “Structures and Practices of Power: 1917 in Nizhegorod and Kazan’ Provinces,” in Russia’s Home Front in War and Revolution, 1914–22, eds. Sarah Badcock, Liudmila G. Novikova, and Aaron B. Retish (Bloomington, Indiana: Slavica Publishers, 2015), 355–81; Ilya V. Gerasimov, Modernism and Public Reform in Late Imperial Russia: Rural Professionals and Self-Organization, 1905–30 (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009), 168–84.

27.  Richard Pipes, The Russian Revolution (New York: Knopf, 1990), 300; see also Stockdale, Paul Miliukov, 243.

28.  Semion Lyandres, “Conspiracy and Ambition in Russian Politics before the February Revolution of 1917: The Case of Prince Georgii Evgenevich Lvov,” Journal of Modern Russian History and Historiography 8 (2015), 99–133; S. P. Melgunov, Na putiakh dvortsovomu perevorotu (zagovory pered revoliutsieĭ 1917 goda) [On the way to a palace coup (plots before the Revolution of 1917)] (Paris: Librairie “La Source,” 1931), 177–78.

29.  Hasegawa, The February Revolution, 520.

30.  Ibid., 523; George Katkov, Russia 1917: The February Revolution (New York: Harper and Row, 1967), 391; Lyandres, The Fall of Tsarism, 162, 164–65. See also ibid., 182 (Matvei Skobelev, a Menshevik, in a 1917 interview, asserts without detail or identification of his source that Maklakov “turned [the ministry] down” in favor of Kerensky).

31.  Hasegawa, The February Revolution, 526–27; Raymond Pearson, The Russian Moderates and the Crisis of Tsarism, 1914–1917 (New York: Barnes and Noble, 1978), 171.

32.  Georgii Adamovich, Vasilii Alekseevich Maklakov: Politik, Iurist, Chelovek [Vasily Alekseevich Maklakov: Politician, jurist, human being] (Paris, 1959), 205. Apart from Rodzianko and Maklakov, another interesting case is the nonselection of Ivan Efremov, a Progressive whom some had evidently contemplated for internal affairs but who had often clashed with Miliukov in the Progressive Bloc. Hasegawa, The February Revolution, 528; Pearson, The Russian Moderates, 171.

33.  Hasegawa, The February Revolution, 526–27, 539–41. See also The Russian Provisional Government 1917—Documents, eds. R. P. Browder and A. F. Kerensky (Stanford, 1961), 1:191. It contains the text of a directive by Kerensky, dated March 2, 1917, confirming the instructions of deputy minister Chebyshev, of the tsarist government, who acted on instructions of Adzhemov and Maklakov.

34.  See Bakhmetev-Maklakov Correspondence, 3:373 (Maklakov to Bakhmetev, December 19, 1927); see also Hasegawa, The February Revolution, 427 (predicting immediate counter-revolution if the Soviet had formed a government).

35.  Hasegawa, The February Revolution, 425. This and the preceding paragraph draw heavily on Hasegawa, The February Revolution, 379–427.

36.  Pipes, The Russian Revolution, 319; Hasegawa, The February Revolution, 558–59.

37.  Compare Pipes, The Russian Revolution, 319, with Katkov, Russia 1917, 408.

38.  Pipes, The Russian Revolution, 319–20.

39.  Mark V. Vishniak, “Sovremennye Zapiski”: Vospominaniia redaktora [“Contemporary Notes”; Recollections of the Editor] (St. Petersburg: Izdatelstvo Logos, 1993), 194. Nina Berberova, not a completely reliable witness, says that when word spread that Mikhail had declined the throne, Maklakov exclaimed, “All is lost.” Liudi i Lozhi [People and lodges] (Moscow: Progress-Traditsiia, 1997), 298–99.

40.  Maklakoff, “Le Dénouement,” 524.

41.  Maklakov, La Chute, 13.

42.  V. D. Nabokov recounts the events surrounding the drafting of Mikhail’s manifesto but does not address the issue of how the grand duke could grant the authority he purports to grant. See V. D. Nabokov, V. D. Nabokov and the Russian Provisional Government, 1917, eds. Virgil D. Medlin and Steven L. Parsons (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1976), 49–55.

43.  Maklakoff, “Le Dénouement,” 530.

44.  V. A. Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost na zakate staroi Rossii (Vospominaniia sovremenika) [State and society in the twilight of old Russia (Recollections of a contemporary)] (Paris: Izdanie zhurnala “Illustrirovanaia Rossiia,” 1936), 559. See also Maklakov, La Chute, 13 (“A new ‘autocracy,’ with complete confusion of powers was established—an absolute power henceforth belonging to ten people chosen in secret party meetings in the Duma’s palace.”). I have not seen any contemporaneous writing of Maklakov voicing this criticism, but Vishniak’s comment that he lost hope in the February Revolution by the end of March 3, plus the priority that he had long given to rule-of-law and similar institutional concerns (e.g., the focus on his attack on the field courts martial), suggest that this was not just hindsight.

45.  Witold S. Swarowski, “The Authorship of the Abdication Document of Nicholas II,” Russian Review 30, no. 3 (July 1971), 277–86.

46.  Ibid., 278–79.

47.  Hasegawa, The February Revolution, 520.

48.  Nikolaev, Gosudarstvennaia duma v Fevral’skoi revoliutsii, 227–28.

49.  See Tsuyoshi Hasegawa, “The Duma Committee, the Provisional Government, and the Birth of ‘Triple Power’ in the February Revolution,” in A Companion to the Russian Revolution, ed. Daniel Orlovsky (Chichester, UK, and Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, forthcoming 2018); Lyandres, “Conspiracy and Ambition in Russian Politics before the February Revolution of 1917,” 99, 132–33; Lyandres, The Fall of Tsarism, 285–90.

50.  Hasegawa, “The Duma Committee”; Pearson, The Russian Moderates, 149.

51.  Maklakoff, “Le Dénouement,” 529.

52.  Ibid., 530.

53.  Ibid., 517–19; B. Maklakoff, “La Russie de 1900 à 1917, Vers la Révolution: Le Dénouement,” Revue de Paris 6 (1924), 609, 610–13. See also Hasegawa, The February Revolution, 364 (describing the appearance of Grand Duke Kirill Vladimirovich [the tsar’s cousin] with the crew of the ship of the First Guard Regiment at the Tauride Palace on February 28, and declaration of his allegiance to the Duma); Pipes, The Russian Revolution, 289 (describing groups of workers, soldiers, intellectuals, and officers marching to the Tauride Palace between February 27 and March 1, including a detachment of the Corps of Gendarmes singing the “Marseillaise” and sporting red flags).

54.  R. B. McKean, St. Petersburg between the Revolutions (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990), 497–98.

55.  Shulgin, Dni * 1920, 174–75.

56.  Nikolaev, Gosudarstvennaia duma v Fevral’skoi revoliutsii, 91–92, 226.

57.  Maklakoff, “Le Dénouement,” Revue de Paris 5 (1924), 518. See also Rech [Speech], May 5, 1917, 304 (Maklakov makes the same point in his speech of May 4, 1917, discussed below); Hasegawa, The February Revolution, 561 (agreeing on the moral necessity for the Duma of favoring the insurgents over the old regime).

58.  Hasegawa, The February Revolution, 557–58.

59.  Orlando Figes and Boris Kolonitskii, Interpreting the Russian Revolution: The Language and Symbols of 1917 (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1999), 72. See also Boris Kolonitskii, “Tragicheskaia erotika”: obrazy imperatorskoi semi v gody Pervoi mirovoi voiny [“Tragic Erotica”: images of the imperial family in the years of the First World War] (Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, 2010).

60.  Ibid., 71–103. See also Leonid Heretz, Russia on the Eve of Modernity: Popular Religion and Traditional Culture under the Last Tsars (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008), 191 (arguing that the war “involved the torrential infusion of ideas and information from the modern Russian/European civilization into the consciousness of the peasantry, which re- [or mis-]interpreted this flow of facts according the categories of the traditional culture and thereby produced a confused and highly volatile mental condition”).

61.  Kolonitskii, “Tragicheskaia erotika,” 26.

62.  Maklakoff, “Le Dénouement,” 531.

63.  Ibid., 534.

64.  Ibid., 532.

65.  Michael T. Florinsky, The End of the Russian Empire (New York: Collier Books, 1961), 191.

66.  On both the development of civil society and the government’s clumsy but assiduous efforts to stifle it, see Wayne Dowler, Russia in 1913 (DeKalb: Northern Illinois University Press, 2012).

67.  Rech, May 5, 1917, 3–4.

68.  Ibid.

      CHAPTER 18: IN THE MAELSTROM: THE LIBERALS IN OFFICE

1.    W. E. Mosse, “The Russian Provisional Government, 1917,” Soviet Studies 15, no. 4 (April 1964), 408–19. See also Richard Pipes, The Russian Revolution (New York: Knopf, 1990), 326; and Melissa Kirschke Stockdale, Paul Miliukov and the Quest for a Liberal Russia, 1880–1918 (Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1996), 249–50.

2.    William G. Rosenberg, Liberals in the Russian Revolution: The Constitutional Democratic Party, 1917–1921 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1974), 148–49.

3.    John L. Keep, The Russian Revolution: A Study in Mass Mobilization (New York: Norton, 1976), 70–71.

4.    Ibid., 172–85.

5.    Joshua A. Sanborn, Imperial Apocalypse: The Great War and the Destruction of the Russian Empire (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014); Joshua A. Sanborn, “Unsettling the Empire: Violent Migrations and Social Disaster in Russia in World War I,” Journal of Modern History 77, no. 2 (June 2005), 290–324.

6.    Pipes, The Russian Revolution, 321–22.

7.    Kermit E. McKenzie, “Zemstvo Organization and Role within the Administrative Structure,” in The Zemstvo in Russia: An Experiment in Local Self-Government, eds. Terence Emmons and Wayne S. Vucinich (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982), 31, 57–61, 65.

8.    Boris I. Kolonitskii, “Antibourgeois Propaganda and Anti-‘Burzhui’ Consciousness in 1917,” Russian Review 53, no. 2 (April 1994), 183–96.

9.    See N. G. Dumova, Kadetskaia partiia v period pervoi mirovoi voiny i Fevralskoi revolutsii [The Kadet party in the period of the First World War and the February Revolution] (Moscow: Nauka, 1988), 101–2; D. A. Chugaev, ed., Revoliutsionnoe dvizhenie v Rossii v iiule 1917 g. [The Revolutionary movement in Russia in July 1917] (Moscow: Izdatelstvo Akademii Nauk SSSR, 1959), 583; Basil Maklakov, “On the Fall of Tsardom,” Slavonic and East European Review 18, no. 52 (July 1939), 77; F. A. Gaida, Liberalnaia oppozitsiia na putiakh k vlasti (1914–vesna 1917 g.) [The liberal opposition on the path to power (1914–Spring 1917)] (Moscow: ROSSPEN, 2003), 339–40; Protokoly, 3:355–56; Maklakov, La Chute, 8–9, 16–18. Compare Leonard Schapiro, The Russian Revolutions of 1917: The Origins of Modern Communism (New York: Basic Books, 1984), 61–62 (commenting on the anomaly of the inquiry commission).

10.  Rex A. Wade, The Russian Search for Peace: February–October 1917 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1969), 64–69.

11.  Sanborn, Imperial Apocalypse, 209–10, 218.

12.  William C. Fuller, Jr., The Foe Within: Fantasies of Treason and the End of Imperial Russia (Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 2006), 240–41. For an overview of the Kerensky-Kornilov affair, see James D. White, “The Kornilov Affair: A Study in Counter-Revolution,” Soviet Studies 20, no. 2 (1968), 187–205.

13.  Rech, June 4, 1917, 2. See also Dumova, Kadetskaia partiia, 146.

14.  Sanborn, Imperial Apocalypse, 201, 236.

15.  Alexander Ivanovich Verkhovskii, Rossiia na Golgof; iz pokhodnago dnevnika [Russia at Golgotha: from a diary on the march] 1914–1918 gg. (Petrograd: “Delo Naroda,” 1918), 113–39.

16.  V. D. Nabokov, V. D. Nabokov and the Russian Provisional Government, 1917, eds. Virgil D. Medlin and Steven L. Parsons (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1976), 152–55.

17.  Semion Lyandres, The Fall of Tsarism: Untold Stories of the February 1917 Revolution (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013), 251, 263. See also S. P. Melgunov, Na putiakh dvortsovomu perevorotu (zagovory pered revoliutsieĭ 1917 goda) [On the way to a palace coup (plots before the Revolution of 1917)] (Paris: Librairie “La Source,” 1931), 153.

18.  Sanborn, Imperial Apocalypse, 173, 222, 257.

19.  Verkhovskii, Rossiia na Golgof, 123–24.

20.  Nabokov, V. D. Nabokov and the Russian Provisional Government, 1917, 153.

21.  Ibid., 154.

22.  Ibid., 152.

23.  Ibid., 96.

24.  https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/верховский, александр иванович.

25.  For a general assessment of Kornilov’s military prowess, see D. N. Collins, “Correspondence,” Soviet Studies 4, no. 4 (April 1970), 528–32.

26.  Pipes, The Russian Revolution, 442–46; Boris Savinkov, K delu Kornilova [The Kornilov Affair] (Paris: 1918), 6–23.

27.  Richard Abraham, Alexander Kerensky: The First Love of the Revolution (New York: Columbia University Press, 1987), 261; Pavel D. Dolgorukov, Velikaia razrukha: Vospominaniia osnovatelia partii kadetov, 1916–1926 [Great devastation: Memoirs of founder of the party of Constitutional Democrats, 1916–1926] (Moscow: Tsentrpoligraf, 2007) 44–45.

28.  Rech, August 16, 1917, 2.

29.  Savinkov, K delu Kornilova, 17; Paul N. Miliukov, The Russian Revolution (Gulf Breeze, FL: Academic International Press, 1978–1987), 2:114–15.

30.  Pipes, The Russian Revolution, 440–41, 446–48; A. Kerenskii, Delo Kornilova [The Kornilov affair] (Ekaterinoslav, 1918), 20–21.

31.  Maklakov, La Chute, 85–86.

32.  Bakhmetev-Maklakov Correspondence, 3:347–48 (Maklakov to Bakhmetev, September 16, 1927).

33.  Anton Ivanovich Denikin, Ocherki russkoi smuty [Notes of the Russian chaos] (Moscow, 1991; reprint of the same, published in Paris in 1922), 2:31.

34.  Bakhmetev-Maklakov Correspondence 3:35 (Maklakov to Bakhmetev, September 16, 1927).

35.  The above account, including the translation of the Hughes machine transcript, is drawn from Pipes, The Russian Revolution, 451–57.

36.  Bakhmetev-Maklakov Correspondence, 3:348–49 (Maklakov to Bakhmetev, September 16, 1927).

37.  Winston Churchill, Great Contemporaries (London: Thornton Butterworth, 1937), 126.

38.  The full text of the transcript appears at D. A. Chugaev, ed., Revoliutsionnoe dvizhenie v Rossii v avguste 1917 g. [The Revolutionary movement in Russia in August 1917] (Moscow: Izdatelstvo Akademii Nauk SSSR, 1959), 448–52.

39.  See Dumova, Kadetskaia partiia, 198, for a version of this conversation edited to erase the difference between a coup against Kerensky and an effort to have the Provisional Government take a stronger line against the prevailing centrifugal tendencies.

40.  Pipes, The Russian Revolution, 458–63.

41.  See, e.g., V. A. Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost na zakate staroi Rossii (Vospominaniia sovremenika) [State and society in the twilight of old Russia (Recollections of a contemporary)] (Paris: Izdanie zhurnala “Illustrirovanaia Rossiia,” 1936), 244–46, 414–16, 457–60, 472–73, 602, 607, 609–10.

      CHAPTER 19: EXILE

1.    Oleg Budnitskii, “Posly nesushchestvuiushchei strany” [Ambassadors of a nonexistent country], introduction to Bakhmetev-Maklakov Correspondence, 1:16.

2.    Ibid., 2:547 (letter of April 24, 1923).

3.    Georgii Adamovich, Vasilii Alekseevich Maklakov: Politik, Iurist, Chelovek [Vasily Alekseevich Maklakov: Politician, jurist, human being] (Paris, 1959), 207.

4.    Bakhmetev-Maklakov Correspondence, 1:197 (Maklakov to Bakhmetev, April 10, 1920).

5.    Bakhmetev-Maklakov Correspondence, 1:366–67 (Maklakov to Bakhmetev, April 15, 1921). Later, in an echo of his 1909 discussion of the way history may turn an illegal coup d’état into a lawful regime, he observed that the émigrés had had to give up the practice of calling the Soviets usurpers; see V. Maklakov, “Zakonnost v Russkoi zhizni” [The rule of law in Russian life], Vestnik Evropy, May 1909. Tyrkova-Williams Diary and Letters, 906 (Maklakov to Tyrkova-Williams, April 6, 1945).

6.    Bakhmetev-Maklakov Correspondence, 2:90 (Maklakov to Bakhmetev, November 8, 1921).

7.    Leon Aron, Roads to the Temple: Truth, Memory, and Ideals in the Makings of the Russian Revolution, 1987–1991 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2012), 11–35.

8.    Tyrkova-Williams replies to him (quite vociferously) in her letter of November 14, 1944, Tyrkova-Williams Diary and Letters, 406; the Maklakov writing to which she responds, evidently undated, appears at ibid., 767n1198.

9.    Tyrkova-Williams Diary and Letters, 906 (Maklakov to Tyrkova-Williams, April 6, 1945). See also Hoover 16-3 (“Les paragraphes de A.K.,” noting that World War II forced Stalin to allow Russians to return to their Russian roots).

10.  V. A. Maklakov, “Sovetskaia vlast i emigratsiia,” [Soviet power and the emigration], Russkie Novosti, May 25, 1945, 2, in Hoover 20-3.

11.  Hoover 10-24 (June 25, 1934).

12.  See Hoover 19-31 (typed copy of text of a June 14, 1946, Soviet decree on re-admitting refugees to Soviet citizenship, published in the June 22, 1946, issue of the pro-Soviet Russkie Novosti). See also Robert Harold Johnston, New Mecca, New Babylon: Paris and the Russian Exiles, 1920–1945 (Kingston and Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 1988), 172–74.

13.  Robert H. Johnston, “The Great Patriotic War and the Russian Exiles in France,” Russian Review 35, no. 3 (July 1976), 303, 309–12.

14.  Ibid., 314–15.

15.  Maklakov’s account is in a seven-page single-spaced typewritten memo in Hoover 19-31.

16.  Johnston, “The Great Patriotic War,” 314.

17.  Richard Abraham, Alexander Kerensky: The First Love of the Revolution (New York: Columbia University Press, 1987), 274.

18.  Brian Boyd, Vladimir Nabokov: The American Years (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1991), 84–85.

19.  Evgenii Efimovskii, “Odin iz Mogikan: Pamiati V. A. Maklakova” [One of the Mohicans: Memories of V. A. Maklakov], Vozrozhdenie 68 (1957), 123–24.

20.  Tyrkova-Williams Diary and Letters, 445 and 778 n.1266 (letter of Tyrkova-Williams to Bakhmetev, June 1, 1951).

21.  Johnston, “The Great Patriotic War,” 318, 320.

22.  Johnston, New Mecca, 33–34.

23.  John M. Thompson, Russia, Bolshevism and Versailles Peace (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1966), 65.

24.  With the agreement of the United States State Department, the work of the conference, including its experts, was financed out of credits of the Provisional Government in the West. Budnitskii, Bakhmetev-Maklakov Correspondence, 1:59.

25.  Ibid., 76; and see ibid., 65–81, for the formation of the group. See also Budnitskii, Bakhmetev-Maklakov Correspondence, 1:57–59, 490n3.

26.  Thompson, Russia, Bolshevism, 73.

27.  Constantine Nabokoff, The Ordeal of a Diplomat (London: Duckworth and Co., 1921), 188.

28.  Thompson, Russia, Bolshevism, 81.

29.  Ibid., 78–79.

30.  Adamovich, Vasilii Alekseevich Maklakov, 209–10. Although there is ample documentation of Maklakov’s speech to the foreign ministers of the Big Five (the Big Four plus Japan) or their delegates, see Svetlana Suveica, “‘Russkoe Delo’ and the ‘Bessarabian Cause’: The Russian Political Émigrés and the Bessarabians in Paris (1919–1920),” Institute for East and Southeast European Studies (IOS), no. 64, February 2014, http://www.dokumente.ios-regensburg.de/publikationen/mitteilungen/mitt_64.pdf; The Roumanian Occupation in Bessarabia: Documents, https://archive.org/stream/roumanianoccupat00paririch#page/124/mode/2up/search/Appendix+No.+37, the discussion with the Big Four, assuming Adamovich’s sources are correct that it occurred at all, is alluded to in formal records (though with a questionable date) but appears to have generated no transcript. See The Case for Bessarabia: A Collection of Documents on the Rumanian Occupation at 20, 26, https://archive.org/stream/caseforbessarabi00russ#page/n3/mode/2up.

31.  Budnitskii, Bakhmetev-Maklakov Correspondence, 1:63.

32.  Jonathan D. Smele, Civil War in Siberia: The Anti-Bolshevik Government of Admiral Kolchak, 1918–1920 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), 183–84.

33.  Thompson, Russia, Bolshevism, 296–303.

34.  Oleg Budnitskii, Russian Jews between the Reds and the Whites, 1917–1920 (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2012), 269.

35.  Ibid., 165–66.

36.  Ibid., 446n142.

37.  Ibid., 169–71.

38.  Bakhmetev-Maklakov Correspondence, 1:256–58 (Maklakov to Bakhmetev, October 21, 1920); Oleg Budnitskii, “The Russian Ambassador in Paris on the Whites and the Jews,” Jews in Eastern Europe no. 3(28) (1995), 62–64 (which contains translations into English of portions of the October 21, 1920, letter); Budnitskii, Russian Jews, 212–15.

39.  Ibid., 311.

40.  Budnitskii, Bakhmetev-Maklakov Correspondence, 1:87; see also Hoover 7-12 (letter to Maklakov from the French foreign ministry dated May 5, 1939, using his and the office’s exact titles); Johnston, New Mecca, 66–69.

41.  Adamovich, Vasilii Alekseevich Maklakov, 213–14.

42.  Roman Petroff, Novembre blanc (St. Malo: Editions L’Ancre de Marine, 2012), 419–20.

43.  Adamovich, Vasilii Alekseevich Maklakov, 214–15.

44.  Marc Raeff, Russia Abroad: A Cultural History of the Russian Emigration, 1919–1939 (Oxford University Press, 1990), 35–36; Vaclav Lednitskii, “Vokrug V. A. Maklakova (lichnye vospominaniia)” [Around V. A. Maklakov (personal reminiscences)], Novyi Zhurnal, no. 56 (March 1959), 239–43.

45.  Budnitskii, Bakhmetev-Maklakov Correspondence, 1:88–89; Johnston, New Mecca, 162; Adamovich, Vasilii Alekseevich Maklakov, 222.

46.  Budnitskii, Bakhmetev-Maklakov Correspondence, 1:90.

47.  Johnston, New Mecca, 178; Hoover 14-11 (March 1, 1945 letter from Maklakov to Alexandra Tolstoy reporting on resumption of efforts); R. L. Uritskaia, Oni liubili svoiu stranu: Sudba russkoi emigratsii vo Frantsii s 1933 po 1948 g. [They loved their country: Destiny of Russian emigration in France from 1933 to 1948] (St. Petersburg: Dmitrii Bulanin, 2010), 205–7.

48.  Budnitskii, Bakhmetev-Maklakov Correspondence, 1:91–92; Tyrkova-Williams Diary and Letters, 1006–1007 (Maklakov to Tyrkova-Williams, August 21, 1955); Lednitskii, “Vokrug V. A. Maklakova,” 247–48.

49.  Adamovich, Vasilii Alekseevich Maklakov, 216, 220; http://goslitmuz.ru/media/videos/.

50.  Berberova, Liudi i lozhi, 301; Johnston, New Mecca, 86.

51.  Lednitskii, “Vokrug V. A. Maklakova,” 246–50; Adamovich, Vasilii Alekseevich Maklakov, 232.

52.  Ibid., 234.

53.  Ibid., 237.

54.  Ibid., 238.

      CHAPTER 20: CODA: THE RULE OF LAW AS THE THIN END OF THE WEDGE

1.    The Federalist, No. 51.

2.    See 28 U.S.C. § 453 (part of the oath required for judges appointed under Article III of the U.S. Constitution).

3.    See Joseph Raz, The Authority of Law, 2nd ed. (Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, 2009), 211 (arguing that use of very broad concepts turns “rule of law” into a proxy for ideal government).

4.    C. L. Stevenson, Ethics and Language (New York: AMS Press, 1979 [reprint]).

5.    Not for all audiences. For some the idea sounds narrow, or rigid, or formulaic, perhaps because of confusion as to what it means.

6.    See, e.g., The World Justice Project, Rule of Law Index (Washington, DC: World Justice Project, 2011), 12 and n8 (scoring “the elimination of discrimination,” and specifically its elimination “in respect of employment and occupation,” as aspects of the rule of law).

7.    For a description of that regime, see Marc Szeftel, “The Form of Government of the Russian Empire Prior to the Constitutional Reforms of 1905–06,” in Essays in Russian and Soviet History in Honor of Geroid Tanquary Robinson, ed. John Shelton Curtiss (New York: Columbia University Press, 1963), 105–19.

8.    See, e.g., Randall Peerenboom, China’s Long March toward Rule of Law (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 397–99. For the concept of “policy drift,” see Matthew D. McCubbins, Roger G. Noll, and Barry R. Weingast, “Structure and Process, Politics and Policy: Administrative Arrangements and the Political Control of Agencies,” Virginia Law Review 75 (1989), 431, 439, 444; McCubbins, Noll, and Weingast, “Administrative Procedures as Instruments of Political Control,” Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 3 (1987), 243, 255, 262.

9.    See, e.g., Francis Spufford, Red Plenty (Minneapolis: Graywolf Press, 2010) (an account in fictionalized form of the ubiquitous back-scratching, deal-making, and principal-agent abuses that developed under the Soviet regime). Of course in a regime as rigid as Soviet economic planning, elimination of these devices would likely make the system still less effective at meeting consumer desires.

10.  Martin Shapiro, “Courts in Authoritarian Regimes,” in Tom Ginsburg and Tamir Moustafa, Rule by Law: The Politics of Courts in Authoritarian Regimes (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008), 326, 334–35, discusses the problem in relation to legitimacy.

11.  Pierre Landry, “The Institutional Diffusion of Courts in China: Evidence from Survey Data,” in Ginsburg and Moustafa, Rule by Law, 207–8. The data supplied here do not answer the question about the duration of the associated stability, in either democracies or authoritarian systems.

12.  The Federalist, No. 78.

13.  Matthew Stephenson, “‘When the Devil Turns . . . .’: The Political Foundations of Independent Judicial Review,” Journal of Legal Studies 32 (2003) (considering feasibility of an independent judiciary in the absence of political constraints on the executive). This is not to preclude the possibility of polities where (for a time) the rule of law is strong but civil society is weak, as is widely considered true of Singapore.

14.  Neysun Mahboubi, “Suing the Government in China,” in Democratization in China, Korea, and Southeast Asia?: Local and National Perspectives, eds. Kate Xiao Zhou, Shelly Rigger, and Lynn T. White III (New York: Routledge, 2014), 141–55.

15.  See, e.g., He Weifang, In the Name of Justice: Striving for the Rule of Law in China (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press, 2012), 71–72 (celebrating congressional debate in the United States).

16.  Alexis de Tocqueville, The Old Regime and the Revolution, ed. François Furet and Françoise Mélonio, trans. Alan S. Kahan, vol. 1 [The Complete Text] (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998), 243.

17.  “Article 1 Being loyal and resolute. A judge shall give priority to the cause of the Party, the interests of the people, and the supremacy of the Constitution and the law, be consistent with the CPC Central Committee in respect of ideology and behaviors, and shall not say any word or commit any conduct in violation of the basic policy of the Party and the state and the socialist judicial system.” Notice of the Supreme People’s Court on Issuing the Code of conduct for Judges (2010 Revision). Translated by the ChinaLawInfo, a database managed by the Peking University Law School.

18.  Shmuel Galai, The Liberation Movement in Russia, 1900–1905 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973), 242–43; V. A. Maklakov, Vlast i obshchestvennost na zakate staroi Rossii (Vospominaniia sovremenika) [State and society in the twilight of old Russia (Recollections of a contemporary)] (Paris: Izdanie zhurnala “Illustrirovanaia Rossiia,” 1936), 355–60.

19.  See Eva Pils, “Charter 08 and Violent Resistance: The Dark Side of the Chinese Weiquan Movement,” in Jean-Philippe Béja, Fu Hualing, and Eva Pils, Liu Xiaobo, Charter 08, and the Challenges of Political Reform in China (Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 2012), 229–49 (noting division of protester community between those hewing closely to nonviolent methods and those embracing violence).

20.  D. C. B. Lieven, “The Security Police, Civil Rights, and the Fate of the Russian Empire, 1855–1917,” in Civil Rights in Imperial Russia, eds. Olga Crisp and Linda Edmondson (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989) 258–61.