The essence of agrarian reform and Stolypin. Stolypin reform briefly

In Russia, the beginning of the 20th century is characterized by a major disintegration of the empire and the creation of the state - the Soviet Union. Most of the laws and ideas did not come true, the rest were not destined to hold out for long. One of the reformers at that moment was Peter Stolypin.

Pyotr Arkadievich was from a noble family. He served in the Ministry of the Interior and was awarded the emperor himself for successfully suppressing a peasant uprising. After the dissolution of the State Duma and the government, the young speaker took over as prime minister. First of all, a list of unfulfilled bills was requested, according to which new orders for governing the country began to be created. As a result several economic solutions appearedthat were called Stolypin.

Laws of Peter Stolypin

Let us dwell on the history of the origin of the plan for the development of the country's economy - the Stolypin agrarian reform.

Background of land relations

Agriculture at that time brought about 60% of the net product and was the main branch of the state economy. But the lands were divided unfairly between classes:

1. The landowners owned most of the cultivated fields.
2. The state had mainly forest plots.
3. The peasant class inherited land, almost unsuitable for cultivation and further sowing.

The peasants began to unite, as a result, new territorial units were obtained - rural societieshaving administrative rights and obligations to their members. In the formed villages there were elders, foremen and even a local court, which examined petty offenses and claims of people against each other. All the high posts of such communities consisted exclusively of peasants.

Representatives of the upper strata of society living in these villages could become members of the community, but without the right to use the land belonging to the village administration, and were obliged to obey the rules of the peasant administrations. Consequently, village officials facilitated the work of the country's central authorities.

Most of the land belonged to communities, which could redistribute plots between the peasants in any form, which led to the emergence of new agriculture. The size of the plot and tax varied depending on the number of workers. Often the land was taken from old people and widows who were unable to fully care for it, and given to young families. If the peasants changed their permanent place of residence - moved to the city - they did not have the right to sell their plots. When peasants were dismissed from the rural community, allotments automatically passed into its ownership, so the land was leased.

In order to somehow balance the problem of the “usefulness” of the plots, the board came up with a new way of cultivating the land. For this, all fields belonging to society were cut into distinctive stripes. Each farm received several such strips located in different parts of the field. This process of cultivating the land began to slow down the prosperity of agriculture.

Land ownership

In the western parts of the country, the conditions for the working class were simpler: a plot was allocated to the peasant community with the possibility of passing it by inheritance. And also this land was allowed to be sold, but only to other persons of the working class of society. Village councils owned only streets and roads. Peasant associations had the perfect right to buy land through private transactions, being full owners. Often, the acquired plots were divided between community members in proportion to the invested funds, and each took care of its share. It was profitable - the larger the field, the lower the price.

Peasant unrest

By 1904, meetings on the agrarian question did not bring any results, despite the fact that rural communities had once again advocated the nationalization of land owned by the landowners. A year later, the All-Russian Union of Peasants was created, which supported the same proposals. But this also did not accelerate the solution of problems on the agrarian issue of the country.

The summer of 1905 was marked by a terrible event at that time - the beginning of the revolution. Peasants who did not have forests on communal lands arbitrarily chopped landowner reserves, plowed their fields and plundered estates. Sometimes there were cases of violence against representatives of law enforcement agencies and arson of buildings.

Stolypin at that time held the post of governor in the Saratov province. But soon he was appointed chairman of the Council of Ministers. Then Pyotr Arkadievich, without waiting for the meeting of the Duma, signed a basic provision allowing the government to take urgent decisions without the approval of the Duma itself. Immediately after that, the ministry put on the agenda a bill of the agrarian system. Stolypin and his reform were able to peacefully suppress the revolution and give people hope for the best.

Peter Arkadevich believed that this the law is the most important goal for the development of the state. This would give a significant increase in the economic and production table. The date of adoption of the project falls on 1907. It became easier for peasants to leave the community, and they still had the right to own their own land. And also the work of the Peasant Bank, which mediated between the working class and the landowners, resumed. The question was raised about the resettlement of peasants, who were given many benefits and huge land plots, which, as a result of Stolypin's agrarian reform, brought enormous economic growth and the settlement of uninhabited districts like Siberia.

Thus, the Stolypin agrarian reform achieved its intended goal. But, despite the growth of the economy, the improvement of ideological and political relations, the adopted bills were in danger of failure due to mistakes made by Stolypin. When trying to establish social security for the working class of the state, it was necessary to carry out severe repressions against organizations that contributed to the start of the revolution. And also the rules of the labor code at enterprises, such as accident insurance and observance of the norms of the duration of the work shift, were not followed - people worked overtime 3-5 hours a day.

September 5, 1911  the great reformer and politician Peter Stolypin was killed. Some time after his death, the new board revised all the bills he created.

The agrarian question is always the main one for Russia

Since 1906, the Russian government under the leadership of P.A. Stolypin carried out a range of activities in the field of agriculture. These activities are collectively referred to as "Stolypin agrarian reform."

The main objectives of the reform:

• transfer of allotment land to the ownership of peasants;
• the gradual abolition of the rural community as a collective owner of land;
• broad lending to peasants;
• buying landowners' land for resale to peasants on favorable terms;
• land management, which allows to optimize the peasant economy due to the elimination of the skirting strip.

The reform set both short-term and long-term goals.

Short term: the resolution of the "agrarian question" as a source of mass discontent (first of all, the cessation of agrarian unrest). Long term: sustainable prosperity and the development of agriculture and the peasantry, the integration of the peasantry in a market economy.

Goals of Agrarian Reform

Agrarian reform was aimed at improving peasant allotment of land use and little affected private land ownership. It was held in 47 provinces of European Russia (all provinces, with the exception of three provinces of the Ostsee region); Cossack land ownership and land ownership of the Bashkirs were not affected.

The historical need for reform

P.A. Stolypin (third from left) while exploring a farm near Moscow, October 1910

The idea of \u200b\u200bagrarian reform arose as a result of the revolution of 1905-1907, when agrarian unrest intensified, and the activities of the first three State Dumas. Agrarian unrest reached a special scale in 1905, the government barely had time to suppress them. Stolypin at that time was the governor of the Saratov province, where unrest was especially strong due to crop failure. In April 1906, P. A. Stolypin was appointed Minister of the Interior. The government project on the forced alienation of part of the landlords' lands was not adopted, the Duma was dissolved, and Stolypin was appointed chairman of the Council of Ministers. Due to the fact that the situation with the agrarian question remained uncertain, Stolypin decided to adopt all the necessary laws, without waiting for the convocation of the Second Duma. On August 27, a decree was issued on the sale of state lands to peasants. October 5, 1906 a decree was issued “On the abolition of certain restrictions on the rights of rural inhabitants and persons of other former taxable status”dedicated to improving the civil status of peasants. On October 14 and 15, decrees were issued expanding the activities of the Peasant Land Bank and facilitating the purchase of land by peasants on credit. On November 9, 1906, the main legislative act of the reform was issued - a decree “On the Supplement of Certain Resolutions of the Current Law Concerning Peasant Land Ownership and Land Use”, proclaiming the right of peasants to secure the ownership of their allotment lands.

Thanks to Stolypin’s bold step (the publication of laws on article 87. This article allowed the government to adopt urgent laws without the approval of the Duma in the interval between the dissolution of one Duma and the convening of a new one), the reform became irreversible. The Second Duma expressed an even more negative attitude towards any undertakings of the government. She was dissolved after 102 days. There was no compromise between the Duma and the government.

The Third Duma, without rejecting the government course, passed all government bills for an extremely long time. As a result, the government since 1907 refuses active legislative activity in agrarian policy and proceeds to expand the activities of government institutions, increase the volume of distributed loans and subsidies. Since 1907, the statements of peasants about securing the ownership of land are satisfied with great delays (there are not enough staff of land survey commissions). Therefore, the main efforts of the government were aimed at training personnel (primarily land surveyors). But the money allocated for reform is also increasing in the form of funding the Peasant Land Bank, subsidizing agronomic assistance measures, direct benefits to peasants.

Since 1910, the government course has been slightly modified - more attention is being paid to supporting the cooperative movement.

Peasant life

On September 5, 1911, P. A. Stolypin was killed, and Finance Minister V. N. Kokovtsov became Prime Minister. Kokovtsov, who showed less initiative than Stolypin, followed the intended course, without introducing anything new into the agrarian reform. The volume of land management work on the spread of land, the amount of land secured by the peasants, the amount of land sold to peasants through the Peasant Bank, the volume of loans to peasants steadily increased until the outbreak of World War I.

During the years 1906-1911. decrees were issued, as a result of which the peasants had the opportunity:

• take the allotment in the property;
• freely leave the community and choose another place of residence;
• move to the Urals to receive land (about 15 hectares) and money from the state to raise the economy;
• immigrants received tax benefits, were exempted from military service.

Agrarian reform

Have the goals of the Stolypin reform been achieved?

This is a rhetorical question when evaluating the activities of reformers; it does not have a clear answer. Each generation will give an answer to it.

Stolypin stopped the revolution and began deep reforms. At the same time, he fell victim to the assassination attempt, was unable to complete his reforms and did not achieve his main goal: in 20 peaceful years to create a great Russia .

Nevertheless, during his activity the following results were achieved:

1. The cooperative movement developed.
2. The number of wealthy peasants increased.
3. In terms of gross bread collection, Russia was in first place in the world.
4. The livestock population increased 2.5 times.
5. About 2.5 million people moved to new lands.

The agrarian reform in Russia at the beginning of the 20th century, called Stolypin in honor of Prime Minister Pyotr Arkadyevich Stolypin, was directly determined not by economic, but by political tasks. After the peasant unrest of 1902-1906. they were looking for the possibility of pacification of the village, and P. Stolypin tried to find support for power in a strong man. However, the reform also had more economic reasons laid down in the entire development of the village after the abolition of serfdom. The landowner wedge, although it was reduced by a quarter by 1900, nevertheless, as many as 30 million peasant families belonged to 30 thousand landowner families. Up to 40% of lands of possible agricultural use were in specific and state ownership. Therefore, the main demand of all peasants during the unrest at the beginning of the 20th century was the division of landowner and royal lands.

But the government in the course of the reform decided to play on the contradictions of the peasantry itself. Among the peasants, social differentiation rapidly intensified. By the beginning of the 20th century 16.5 million peasants had land plots of 1 tithe, a fifth of the peasantry turned out to be completely landless - these were rural farm laborers, who accounted for 3.5 million or 20% of the adult male population of the village.

In general, the poor accounted for about 50% of the peasants and used only about 30% of the land, while 10% of kulak farms used almost half of the land. The peasant allotment on average for one revision soul was constantly decreasing and amounted in the 1860s. - 4.8 tithing, in the 1880th - 3.5 tithing, in 1900 - 2.6 tithing.

The main obstacle to the capitalist modernization of agriculture in Russia at the beginning of the 20th century. it was not landlord tenure, but communal. The landowner economy faster than the peasant economy evolved towards the market, improved the technology and organization of the economy. Note that the share of landlord agriculture in England, for example, was much larger than in Russia. This did not prevent the fact that England's agriculture was one of the most developed in the world. Community tenure in Russia by the beginning of the 20th century spread to almost 100% of agricultural land used by peasants.

With the development of the market and social differentiation in the countryside, the communal tenure of land tenure even intensified. Increasing land redistribution was dictated by the attempts of the poor to not only improve their economic situation, but to worsen the situation of the richer villagers. And the tsarist government even prevented the weakening of the community at first, so in 1893 a law was passed prohibiting even peasants who paid redemption payments for allotment land from the community, since the community made it easier to collect taxes when the rich paid for the poor .

Despite the fact that the agrarian reform is called Stolypin, its main ideas and proposals on areas for implementation belong to S. Witte, who, as early as 1896, spoke out for the first time against communal land ownership and mutual responsibility. In 1898, in connection with this, he sent an official letter to the Tsar and in 1903 he managed to achieve the abolition of mutual responsibility, after which each family was now fully responsible for its duties.

After the peasant unrest of 1902, special editorial commissions were created at the Ministry of the Interior to review all legislation on peasants, including land tenure, the community, mutual responsibility, etc. In the same year, a special meeting was created under the leadership of S. Witte to clarify the needs of agricultural production. 618 local committees of this meeting were also formed. In these organizations, the bulk were officials and landowners, and peasants - only 2%.

At meetings and in the press, the main ideas were expressed, which later laid the foundation for agrarian reform. In the majority of the speeches, the main cause of the peasants' ill-being was called technical backwardness, therefore it was proposed to improve the technology of the economy, to move to a multifield with crops of root crops and herbs. And since the community impeded this modernization, most committees made the conclusion that it was necessary to help the transition from communal land ownership to farmstead and farm land, giving the peasants the right to leave the communities even without its consent. They also pointed out the need to allow peasants leaving the community to sell their land, level peasants with other classes in economic and civil rights, etc. But then the Witt conference was recognized as too left-wing and dismissed.

However, the reforms in the village were long overdue and even overripe, and peasant unrest flared up again in mid-1905, forced to begin the urgent transformation of agriculture even before P. Stolypin. August 12, 1905 introduced new rules that expanded the activities of the Peasant Bank. On August 27, a law on state lands was adopted for the same purpose. On November 3, 1905, the law marked redemption payments for allotment land. The peasants had already paid the ransom amount a long time ago and by that time they had only paid interest on installments. On March 14, 1906, new rules on land management were adopted, and on March 10, 1906, the law on the freedom of resettlement of peasants.

At the peak of the revolutionary events in the fall of 1905, the project of Professor P. Migulin on the immediate transfer of half of the landlord lands to peasants was very popular. The government at that time was ready to give them 25 million dessiatins. landowner and specific land. But already at the beginning of 1906, after some recession of the revolution, these bills were rejected and the land of the land became untouchable. Instead, the government emphasized increasing the number of strong peasant farms at the expense of the poorest members of the community.

The arrival of P. Stolypin in the spring of 1906 to the post of Minister of the Interior, and in July and to the post of Chairman of the Council of Ministers, sharply accelerated agrarian reforms. P. Stolypin himself hardly put forward new ideas, and his merit is that he carried out this reform consistently and even excessively tough, relying on his police experience and apparatus. The transition to a new course of agrarian policy was completed by the law of November 9, 1906, which was called "On Amending and Supplementing Some Decisions on Peasant Land Ownership" or as it was essentially called "on the destruction of the community." Note that P. Stolypin carried out agrarian laws in a non-parliamentary way, besides the State Duma, in accordance with article 87 of the main laws, as emergency and impatient delays. The Duma legalized these reforms only on June 14, 1910.

In agrarian reform, 3 main directions can be distinguished: 1. Destruction of the community and change of peasant land ownership. 2. The use of a peasant land bank to plant prosperous peasant farms through the sale of land and loan assistance. 3. Migration policy on the free lands of the North Caucasus, the Urals and Siberia due to lack of land in Central Russia. These three areas are closely interconnected and complement each other. Let's consider them in more detail.

All peasant communities were divided into two groups: communities that did not redistribute the land and communities that carried out such redistributions. The former were recognized as having directly passed on to homestead ownership, and all plots of land were assigned to individual householders on the basis of personal property. In the communities where the redistribution was carried out, the householder could at any time demand that he be assigned to the personal property of the land due to him for the redistribution. The community was obliged, in the case of skirting, to provide plots of land to stand out in one place. The peasants who came out retained the right to use shared lands (hayfields, forests, etc.). The peasants went to the cut, if they continued to live in the village, and to the farm, if they transferred the house to their site.

In the case when the community did not consider the application for withdrawal within a month, there was an imperious interference from above. If at the time of the exit the peasant used more land than the average per capita in the community, he bought it from the community at prices of 1861, which were 2–3 times lower than the actual prices of the beginning of the 20th century. Any who stood out could freely sell their land, which was especially widely used by the low-land, who left for the city. Although the law limited the possibility of buying up allotment land to no more than 6 allotment plots, nevertheless, it provided more opportunities for wealth concentration among land owners.

The results of this area of \u200b\u200bagrarian reform can be judged by such data. Until January 1, 1916, a total of 2755 thousand households claimed allotment of land in European Russia, of which 1008 thousand were allocated from the community with an area of \u200b\u200barable land of 14123 thousand dessiatins. In addition, they received satisfactory acts on securing plots where there were no redistribution of 470 thousand households with an area of \u200b\u200b2796 thousand dess. In total, 2478 thousand householders with an area of \u200b\u200b16.919 thousand dessiatins left the community and secured the land in personal property, which made up about 24% of all peasant households in 40 provinces of European Russia.

The largest number of exits from the community occurred in 1908 - 1909. This is due to the fact that at this time the most interested people came out, i.e. the most well-to-do or those who were more likely to liquidate their land and land ownership. In subsequent years, therefore, the number of fastenings and exits greatly decreased. The greatest number of exits and anchorage was observed in the territories capitalistically most developed, such as the Kiev province and Novorossia.

The 2nd direction of the Stolypin reform includes the activities of the Peasant Bank for the sale of land and support for strong owners among peasants. A peasant land bank received the right to independently purchase privately owned land, primarily landowners and sell them to peasants. The Bank helped the nobles to sell their estates profitably, crushed them, as well as giving him state and specific lands, divided into plots, and sold them to peasants. The Bank issued loans for the arrangement and development of peasant farms, provided assistance in resettlement.

During the ten years of reform (1906–1915), 4326 thousand dessiatines were transferred to the land fund of the Peasant Bank, and specific lands only 1258 thousand dessiatins. Treasury lands were handed over to the peasants only in case of resettlement to Siberia, but here, despite the vast territories, the number of land plots ready for settlement was quickly exhausted. The price of land was constantly growing, largely due to the speculative activities of the Peasant Bank, and by 1916 it rose 1.5–2 times. For 1895-1905 the bank bought land from landowners on average at 71 rubles per dess., and for 1906 - 1915 at 161 rubles. This, despite a decrease of 80%, according to all economic laws and the price of land was supposed to fall. Therefore, even P. Stolypin himself insisted on the sale of land directly to the peasants themselves, bypassing the bank. He sold the Peasant Bank of the land from his fund mainly to independent peasant farms. So, for 1907 - 1916. 54.6% were sold to farmers, 23.4% to farmers, 17% to rural companies, and 5% of all land sales.

Sold the land and the peasants. For the years 1908-1915 1.2 million peasant households sold their allotment land of 3.9 million dessiatins, more than half of those who sold the land broke up with the village altogether and left for the city, while others sold the land to buy it in one plot and in case of resettlement. A peasant bank issued loans for the development of farms, but differentiation was also observed here - only 159 rubles per person were issued through the community, and 500 rubles for an individual person.

For a long time, the tsarist government not only did not encourage the resettlement of peasants on the outskirts of the country, where there was a lot of free land, but even prevented this. Thus, the law of 1881 and 1889 imposed all restrictions on resettlement so as not to deprive landowners of cheap tenants and workers. Only during the construction of the Trans-Siberian Railway did relocation be encouraged. In the 1890s. acted land commission of General I. Zhilinsky. It was built 722 resettlement sites, hundreds of wells, gateways, and reservoirs. Total costs amounted to 2.5 billion rubles - this is about two annual budgets of that time. Only on June 6, 1904 by law was resettlement declared free, but even so it was divided into government-sponsored (financial and other benefits) and not encouraged.

During the Stolypin reform, the number of landless and low-land peasants was supposed to increase even more, and in order to weaken their unrest, resettlement to free lands, mainly to the east, although slightly to the North Caucasus, was strongly encouraged. Resettlement was actively helped by the Peasant Bank with loans and subsidies. The state lands occupied by the immigrants promised to be transferred to their private property. For the Urals, wishing to receive land for free, 15 dessiatins were transferred. per host and 4.5 dess. for each member of the family. A peasant bank was supposed to buy land from immigrants in an abandoned place at a market price. Provided material assistance for the move. For those who moved to the Far East, 400 rubles were given per family, with 200 rubles free of charge. On average, it turned out 165 rubles per family. Immigrants were exempted from taxes for 3 years and from draft in the army.

Over 10 years of reform, more than 3 million people have resettled in the Urals, they have mastered about 30 million dess. empty land. The maximum number of immigrants reached in 1908-1909, as well as those who left the community. Then, the optimistic expectations for a successful move and the placement of a wealthy master in a new place weakened, especially since some of the immigrants began to come back and talk about failures. The land management commissions did not always do their job, there were not enough funds for the arrangement, part of them even plundered, lack of knowledge of local environmental conditions, tormented by illness, etc. Thus, more than 100 thousand immigrants died in ten years of the reform. The flow of those who returned to their old place of residence constantly increased. If at first the returnees made up only 6 - 8% of all those who left, then in the following years 20% -30%, and in the hungry 1911, 64% generally returned. Out of 3 million people who left the Urals, about 0.5% million returned back.

Despite the initial promise, private ownership of land was not widespread in Siberia. Most of the land belonged to the treasury or treasury army. Usually, peasants who settled on state lands received it not for ownership, but for unlimited use. P. Stolypin even considered the issue of selling state land beyond the Urals. This only confirms his ignorance of the specific economic situation, he still more versed in police matters.

The peasants did not always have enough money even for travel, not to mention the arrangement. The Stolypin agrarian program was not limited to only these three areas. He made a number of proposals to improve peasant land tenure and land use, to organize a state insurance system for peasant farms, to establish a primary education system for peasants and to develop it up to secondary, with 150 more added to the existing primary peasant schools, changes were planned in local self-government. The cooperative movement of all kinds among the peasants developed rapidly, the center of this movement was the specially created People's Bank. If for 1901 - 1905. 641 consumer societies were created in Russia, for 1906–11. 4715 — an increase of 7.4 times, and the number of credit partnerships for 1905–1913. increased 6.7 times. Successfully developed and production cooperation, for example, Siberian butter-makers. Siberian oil in Europe was considered better than Dutch.

P. Stolypin believed that the agrarian reform was proceeding successfully, and if he demanded 50 years for the reconstruction of the village, then in March 1910. He said that with such successful work in 6-7 years there will be almost no community, so the government will not carry out its violent demolition. In general, at the beginning of the XX century. agriculture developed successfully. Yields increased, for example, in wheat in 1906 amounted to 31.3 pounds. with dess., in 1909 –55.4 pounds; in 1913, 58.2 pounds; for rye, respectively –34.5 pounds, 53.1 pounds, 61.3 pounds. The gross harvest of wheat in 1906 amounted to 565.9 million. pood., in 1913. –1082.3 million pood. –– 1.8 times growth; rye, respectively, 819.6 million. pood. and 1299.1 million. pood. –1.6 times. Grain export reached 15.5 million tons in 1912 and doubled compared to 1900.

The situation was worse with the development of animal husbandry. From 1900 to 1913 the number of horses increased from 19.7 million to 22.8 million heads, cattle from 31.7 million heads to 31.9 million; pigs from 11.7 million heads to 13.5 million, and sheep even decreased from 47.6 million heads to 41.4 million. Per capita and tithe of crops, the number of livestock decreased. So, for 100 dess. cattle in 56 provinces accounted for cattle in 1901-1905. 46 goals. And in 1913 –43; sheep, respectively, 66 and 56 goals; the number of pigs increased from 17 goals to 18 goals. These facts show that, despite emerging in 1900 - 1913. agrotechnical growth agriculture basically still has not completely outlived the triple field and continued to develop by expanding grain areas and reducing fodder areas and livestock numbers, especially per capita. And this is typical mainly for the extensive development of agriculture by expanding the used area.

Although the technical level also grew somewhat, which was manifested in the increase and use of agricultural machinery and fertilizers. If in 1900 agricultural machinery was consumed in the amount of 27.9 million rubles and in 1908 by 61.3 million rubles, then in 1913 it was already worth 109.2 million rubles. However, this increase in the number of machines used was, of course, due to the capitalizing landlord and kulak economy. The general technical level of the bulk of the peasant economy remained very low, most of the peasant fields were cultivated with plow, the sowing of grain and threshing was carried out in a primitive manual way. So, in 1910, 3 million wooden plows, 7.9 million wooden plows, 5.7 million wooden harrows, 15.9 million harrows with iron teeth and only 490 thousand completely iron were used in all agriculture in Russia harrow, 811 thousand reaping machines and a total of 27 thousand steam threshers.

Just before World War I, the number of iron plows was equal to the number of plows and wooden plows. Tractors and other complex machines were not at all. The use of artificial fertilizers is another sign of the intensification of agricultural production; on this basis, Russia lagged far behind the West. In 1900, 6 million poods were imported, and in 1912 already 35 million poods. The domestic production of phosphates of all types amounted to 1,425 thousand pounds in 1908, and by 1912 it increased to 3235 thousand pounds, i.e. while it was mainly overseas goods.

Another indicator of the intensive development of agriculture is the expansion of crops. Here, over the 15 pre-war years, significant progress has been observed. The cultivated areas under cotton increased to the greatest extent - 111.6%, sunflowers - 61%, sugar beets - 39.5%, tobacco - 18.5%, potatoes –15.8%, and forage grasses by 79.3%. Although this expansion was mainly due to new areas, and not due to grain, as in the most developed countries. The area under cereals in Russia also increased - by 10.8%.

However, these some successes in agriculture cannot be attributed only to the Stolypin reform, since at that time there was a general global upsurge in agriculture, the agrarian crisis ended at the end of the 19th century. Russia was lucky with the fact that except for 1911, all other years brought good harvests. On the whole, P. Stolypin was not able to pacify the village. Social differentiation and contradictions in it even escalated. The number of poor people exceeded 60%, the proportion of horseless in 1913 amounted to 31.4%. As before, all the peasants jointly stood for the division of landowners and specific lands, and the poor also for the division of the kulaks.

Communal land ownership extended to 75% of peasant land. Due to archaic relations in the village, productive forces and productivity growth slowly developed, especially in comparison with the West. The tsarist government preserved backward relations in the countryside until the end of the 19th century, supporting the interests of the landlords and seeing their support in the peasant community and the middle peasant. But the economic and socio-political contradictions from this accumulated and escalated. What intensity they reached, showed peasant unrest in 1902 and 1905-1906. The merit of P. Stolypin was that he did not try to brush aside these problems and flirt with the whole village, but took a firm course to strengthen the alliance with only one part of the peasantry - strong masters.

But the kulaks did not become a strong support of the tsarist government, they retained extensive ties with the entire peasantry and could not consolidate into an independent political force. Like all peasants, they still rooted in landlord and royal lands, therefore, together with the whole peasantry, they supported at first the February Revolution, and then at first even the Bolsheviks (in liquidating the landowner tsarist land tenure). Thus, agrarian reforms in Russia were delayed for several decades, which was reflected not only in the lag of productive forces, but also in the support by all peasants of Russia of three-revolutions of the beginning of the 20th century.

Stolypin reforms (briefly)

Stolypin carried out his reforms since 1906, when he was appointed prime minister until his death on September 5, which came from the bullets of killers.

Agrarian reform

In short, the main goal of Stolypin's agrarian reform was to create a wide layer of wealthy peasants. Unlike the reform of 1861, the emphasis was on the sole proprietor, and not on the community. The former, communal form fettered the initiative of the working peasants, and now, having freed themselves from the community and not looking at the "wretched and drunk", they could dramatically increase the efficiency of their economy. The law of 06/14/1910 stipulated that from now on, “every householder who owns allotment land under communal law may at any time demand the strengthening of personal property owing to him part of the indicated land”. Stolypin believed that the prosperous peasantry would become a real pillar of the autocracy. An important part of the Stolypin agrarian reform was the activity of a credit bank. This institution sold land to the peasants, either state or redeemed from the landowners. Moreover, the interest rate on loans for independent peasants was twice lower than for communities. Through a credit bank, peasants acquired in 1905-1914. about 9 and a half million hectares of land. However, the measures against defaulters were tough: the land was taken from them and again went on sale. Thus, the reforms not only made it possible to acquire land, but also encouraged active work on it. Another important part of Stolypin’s reform was the relocation of peasants to free lands. A bill prepared by the government provided for the transfer of state land in Siberia to private hands without redemption. However, there were difficulties: there were not enough funds or land surveyors for land surveying. But despite this, the resettlement to Siberia, as well as the Far East, Central Asia and the North Caucasus was gaining momentum. Moving was free, and specially equipped "Stolypin" cars allowed cattle to be transported by rail. The state tried to equip life at the places of resettlement: schools, medical centers, etc. were being built.

Zemstvo

Being a supporter of the Zemstvo administration, Stolypin extended the Zemstvo institutions to some provinces where they had not existed before. This was not always politically simple. For example, the implementation of the Zemstvo reform in the western provinces, historically dependent on the gentry, was approved by the Duma, which supported the improvement of the situation of the Belarusian and Russian population, who constituted the majority in these territories, but met with sharp rebuff in the State Council, which supported the gentry.

Industry reform

The main stage in resolving the working issue during the years of Stolypin’s premiership was the work of the Special Meeting in 1906 and 1907, which prepared ten bills affecting the main aspects of labor in industrial enterprises. These were questions about the rules for hiring workers, accident and illness insurance, working hours, etc. Unfortunately, the positions of industrialists and workers (as well as those who incited the latter to insubordination and rebellion) were too far apart and the compromises found did not suit either one or the other (which all kinds of revolutionaries willingly used).

National issue

Stolypin perfectly understood the importance of this issue in such a multinational country like Russia. He was a supporter of the union, and not the separation of the peoples of the country. He proposed the creation of a special ministry of nationalities, which would study the characteristics of each nation: history, traditions, culture, social life, religion, etc. - so that with the greatest mutual benefit they flow into our great power. Stolypin believed that all peoples should have equal rights and duties and be faithful to Russia. Also, the task of the new ministry should have been to counteract the internal and external enemies of the country, seeking to sow interethnic and religious discord.

Stolypin reform

The reform of 1861 is the first stage of the transition to the individualization of land tenure and land use. But the abolition of serfdom did not lead to the progress of private property. In the 80-90s, the government sought to impose community structures in the village, which contradicted the future of free peasant property. Reforms initiated by P. A. Stolypin could overcome these difficulties. His conception "suggested a way to develop a mixed, multistructure economy, where state forms of economy had to compete with collective and private." The constituent elements of his programs are the transition to farms, the use of cooperation, the development of land reclamation, the introduction of a three-stage agricultural education, the organization of cheap credit for peasants, the formation of an agricultural party, which really represented the interests of smallholders.

Stolypin puts forward the liberal doctrine of managing the rural community, eliminating through stripes, developing private property in the countryside and achieving economic growth on this basis. With the progress of market-oriented peasant farming, the development of land purchase and sale relations should lead to a natural reduction in the landowner land fund. The future agrarian system of Russia was presented to the premiere in the form of a system of small and medium-sized farms, united by local self-governing and small-sized noble estates. On this basis, the integration of two cultures was to take place - the noble and peasant.

Stolypin relies on "strong and strong" peasants. However, it does not require universal uniformity, unification of land ownership and land use. Where, due to local conditions, the community is economically viable, "it is necessary for the peasant himself to choose the way of using the land that suits him best."

Agrarian reform consisted of a series of sequentially conducted and interrelated activities. Consider the main directions of reform.

Activities of the peasant bank.

The Bank conducted a large-scale purchase of land with subsequent resale to peasants on preferential terms, and intermediary operations to increase peasant land use. He increased the credit to the peasants and significantly reduced the cost of it, and the bank paid a higher percentage of its obligations than the peasants paid it. The difference in payment was covered by subsidies from the budget, amounting to 1,457.5 billion rubles for the period from 1906 to 1917.

The Bank actively influenced land ownership: for peasants who acquired land in sole ownership, payments were reduced. As a result, if until 1906 the majority of land buyers were peasant collectives, then by 1913 79.7% of buyers were sole peasants.

COMMUNITY DESTRUCTION AND PRIVATE PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT.

For the transition to new economic relations, a whole system of economic and legal measures was developed to regulate the agricultural economy. The decree of November 9, 1906 proclaimed the predominance of the fact of sole ownership of land over the legal right to use. The peasants could now allocate the land, which was in actual use, from the community, regardless of its will. The land allotment became the property not of a family, but of a separate householder.

Measures were taken to ensure the strength and stability of labor peasant farms. So, in order to avoid speculation in land and concentration of property, the maximum size of individual land ownership was limited by law, and land was sold to non-peasants.

The law of June 5, 1912 permitted the issuance of a loan against bail of any allotment land acquired by peasants. The development of various forms of credit - mortgage, land reclamation, agricultural, land management - contributed to the intensification of market relations in the countryside.

In 1907 - 1915 25% of the households declared the separation from the community, while 20% - 2008.4 thousand households really stood out. Widespread new forms of land ownership: farm and cut. As of January 1, 1916, there were already 1221.5 thousand of them. In addition, the law of June 14, 1910 considered it unnecessary for many peasants to leave the community, which were only formally considered community members. The number of such households amounted to about one third of all communal households.

MOVEMENT OF PEASANTS TO SIBERIA.

By decree of March 10, 1906, the right to resettle peasants was granted to everyone without restrictions. The government allocated considerable funds for the costs of arranging immigrants in new places, for their medical care and public needs, and for laying roads. In 1906-1913, 2792.8 thousand people moved beyond the Urals. The scale of this event also led to difficulties in its implementation. The number of peasants who were unable to adapt to new conditions and forced to return was 12% of the total number of migrants.

The results of the resettlement company were as follows. Firstly, during this period, a huge leap was made in the economic and social development of Siberia. Also, the population of this region over the years of colonization increased by 153%. If before the resettlement to Siberia there was a reduction in sown areas, then in 1906-1913 they were expanded by 80%, while in the European part of Russia by 6.2%. In terms of livestock development, Siberia also overtook the European part of Russia.

COOPERATIVE MOVEMENT.

The loans of a peasant bank could not fully satisfy the peasant's demand for monetary goods. Therefore, credit cooperation, which went through two stages in its movement, became widespread. At the first stage, administrative forms of regulating small credit relations prevailed. By creating qualified personnel for small loan inspectors and allocating significant loans through state banks for initial loans to credit partnerships and for subsequent loans, the government stimulated a cooperative movement. At the second stage, rural credit partnerships, accumulating their own capital, developed independently. As a result, a wide network of small peasant credit institutes, loan-saving banks and credit partnerships that serviced the money circulation of peasant farms was created. By January 1, 1914, the number of such institutions exceeded 13 thousand.

Credit relations gave a strong impetus to the development of production, consumer and marketing cooperatives. On a cooperative basis, peasants created dairy and butter farms, agricultural societies, consumer shops, and even peasant artel dairy plants.

AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES.

One of the main obstacles to the economic progress of the village was the low farming culture and illiteracy of the vast majority of producers who were accustomed to working according to a common custom. During the years of reform, farmers received large-scale agro-economic assistance. Agro-industrial services for peasants were specially created, which organized training courses on cattle breeding and dairy production, democratization and the introduction of progressive forms of agricultural production. Much attention was paid to the progress of the system of out-of-school agricultural education. If in 1905 the number of students at agricultural courses amounted to 2 thousand people, then in 1912 - 58 thousand, and at agricultural readings - respectively 31.6 thousand and 1046 thousand people.

At present, it is believed that Stolypin’s agrarian reforms led to the concentration of the land fund in the hands of a few rich people as a result of the landlessness of the bulk of the peasants. Reality shows an inverse increase in the proportion of "middle strata" in peasant land use. This is clearly seen from the data given in the table. During the reform period, peasants actively bought land and increased their land fund annually by 2 million dessiatins. Also, peasant land use increased significantly due to the lease of landlord and state lands.

DISTRIBUTION OF LAND FUND BETWEEN GROUPS OF PEASANTS - BUYERS

The results of the reform are characterized by a rapid increase in agricultural production, an increase in the capacity of the domestic market, and an increase in agricultural exports, and Russia's trade balance has become more and more active. As a result, it was possible not only to get agriculture out of the crisis, but also to turn it into the dominant of Russia's economic development. The gross income of all agriculture in 1913 amounted to 52.6% of the total GDP. The income of the entire national economy, due to the increase in the value created in agriculture, increased in comparable prices from 1900 to 1913 by 33.8%.

Differentiation of types of agricultural production by regions led to an increase in the marketability of agriculture. Three quarters of all industry-processed raw materials came from agriculture. The agricultural commodity turnover increased during the reform period by 46%.

Even more, by 61% compared with 1901-1905, the export of agricultural products increased in the prewar years. Russia was the largest producer and exporter of bread and flax, a number of livestock products. So, in 1910, Russian wheat exports accounted for 36.4% of total world exports.

The foregoing does not mean at all that pre-war Russia should be represented as a "peasant paradise." The problems of hunger and agricultural overpopulation were not resolved. The country continued to suffer from technical, economic and cultural backwardness. According to the calculations of I. D. Kondratiev, in the USA, on average, the farm accounted for fixed capital in the amount of 3900 rubles, and in European Russia the fixed capital of the average peasant farm barely reached 900 rubles. The national per capita income of the agricultural population in Russia was approximately 52 rubles per year, and in the United States - 262 rubles.

The growth rate of labor productivity in agriculture was relatively slow. While in Russia in 1913 they received 55 pounds of bread from one tithe, in the USA they received 68 pounds, in France - 89, and in Belgium - 168 pounds. Economic growth occurred not on the basis of intensification of production, but due to an increase in the intensity of manual peasant labor. But in the period under review, socio-economic conditions were created for the transition to a new stage of agrarian transformations - the transformation of agriculture into a capital-intensive technologically advanced sector of the economy.

But a number of external circumstances (the death of Stolypin, the beginning of the war) interrupted the Stolypin reform. Stolypin himself believed that for the success of his endeavors it would take 15-20 years. But for the period 1906 - 1913 a lot was done.

What lessons can we learn from the experience of the Stolypin reform? First, Stolypin began his reforms very late (not in 1861, but only in 1906). Secondly, the transition from a natural type of economy to a market one under the conditions of an administrative-command system is possible, first of all, on the basis of the vigorous activity of the state. At the same time, the financial and credit activity of the state should play a special role. An example of this is the government, which has managed to reorient the empire’s powerful bureaucratic apparatus towards energy work with astonishing speed and scope. At the same time, "local economic and economic profitability was sacrificed consciously for the future social effect of the creation and development of new economic forms." So the Ministry of Finance, the Peasant Bank, the Ministry of Agriculture, and other state institutions acted.

Thirdly, where administrative principles of economic management and equalizing methods of distribution dominated, there will always be strong opposition to transformations. Therefore, it is necessary to have social support in the face of initiative and qualified segments of the population.

LITERATURE

1. Kovalchenko I. D. "Stolypin agrarian reform"; "History of the USSR" No. 2 1992.

2. Glagolev A. "Formation of the economic concept of P. A. Stolypin"; "Issues of Economics" No. 10,1990.

3. Rumyantsev M. "Stolypin agrarian reform: prerequisites, tasks and results"; "Issues of Economics" No. 10,1990.

4. Stolypin P. A. "Collection of speeches by P. A. Stolypin delivered at the meetings of the State Council and the State Duma of 1906-1911" (Reprint).

Arkhyz water delivery.