The Legislative Act, or the Manifesto of October 17, 1905, which was drafted by the government and signed by Emperor Nicholas II, is still controversial.
Why was the Manifesto created?
The beginning of the twentieth century was stormy and unpredictable due to major changes in the state and society. Due to the abolition of serfdom, the country's economy lost free labor. On the other hand, the unskilled labor of the serfs would not have made it possible to quickly reorganize into industrial production and a market economy. The economy was crumbling before our eyes. From a prosperous state under the very weak leadership of Emperor Nicholas II, Russia became dependent on external debt, a starving country. The people took to the streets. Small riots gained momentum, gradually becoming like real revolutionary performances. "Bloody Sunday" was the impetus for mass protests, which began to be controlled and prepared by opposition activists. For the first time during the October speeches, calls began to be heard for the overthrow of the autocratic power of the emperor. Decisive government action was required. Under such conditions, the Manifesto was developed on October 17, 1905.
The reaction of the king and governmentto mass demonstrations
More than two million people were on strike in October, during the peak of popular armed uprisings. First, forceful methods were used against the revolutionaries, then a wave of mutually exclusive tsarist decrees swept through, which angered the masses even more. The people were then even more powerless than under serfdom, and deprived of any opportunity to express their wishes, to be heard. Back in May 1905, there was an attempt to limit the power of the emperor and share his powers with the Duma. The king did not sign this document. Under the pressure of revolutionary events, both Nicholas II and the Witte government had to return to this document. The emperor and the government decided to stop the pogroms, bloodshed, mass demonstrations with the help of the Manifesto, which was compiled by S. Yu. Witte and signed by Nicholas II.
The significance of the manifesto of October 17, 1905 is enormous - it is to him that Russia owes the first significant change in the state structure, which the autocracy replaced with a constitutional monarchy.
What did the historical document say?
The document, known in history as the "Manifesto on the improvement of the state order", signed on October 17, 1905 by the Russian autocrat Nicholas II, was supposed to bring positive changes to the state. Manifesto October 17, 1905 granted:
- Permission for freedom of conscience, speech, unions and assembly, which immediately spawned many political currents and protestersassociations.
- Admission to the elections of various segments of the population, regardless of class and material status, which was the beginning of the development of a democratic society.
- Mandatory approval by the State Duma of various laws issued in the state. From that moment on, the emperor ceased to be the sole ruler and legislator of Russia, since his power was controlled by the Duma.
However, the Manifesto of October 17, 1905, the content of which was progressive for the beginning of the twentieth century, did not fundamentally change the situation in the country.
Final innovations of the October legislative act
It was the Manifesto of October 17, 1905 that was able to temporarily suspend the revolutionary movement, but it soon became clear to Russian society that this was a bone thrown by the hungry. There were no actual changes. They were only on paper. The emergence of a modern legislative body, which was supposed to be interested in the opinion of the people, the declining role of the emperor in lawmaking and certain freedoms made it possible to organize a huge number of opposition movements and parties.
But the inconsistency of actions and party priorities, a lot of ideological calls for various supposed directions in overcoming the economic crisis, still dragged the country down. Nicholas II reserved the right to dissolve the Duma, therefore the Manifesto proclaimed on October 17, 1905 and its ideas did not receive the necessary development, but only made the situation even more uncontrollable.
Historical consequences
Thanks to the preserved correspondence of Nicholas II and the diaries of eyewitnesses, many events became known to us. After the Manifesto was signed on October 17, 1905, S. Yu. Witte showed inaction, the government was unable to normalize the situation in the country. A situation was created of the usual struggle for a place under the sun. The speeches were striking in their eloquence, but did not contain a solution to the crisis. But most importantly, no one wanted to take full responsibility for further actions to govern the country, legislative changes and effective economic reforms. The principle of criticizing the emperor's actions on the sidelines and at balls without a fundamental solution to the problem became familiar. No one possessed the leadership qualities that would have made it possible to end the crisis. The centuries-old traditions of autocracy did not create at that stage a person capable of replacing the emperor at least partially.
Actions of the government and S. Yu. Witte
Witte, who had to order the execution of demonstrators instead of proclaiming democratic reforms, wanted the blood of all revolutionaries, and instead of making positive proposals in favor of the state, he turned into an executioner. But no matter how the Manifesto of October 17, 1905 was called, this document became a turning point in the history of the state system and the centuries-old traditions of Russia. The actions of the emperor are difficult to assess unambiguously.
The Manifesto of October 17, 1905 played a significant role in history as the only way to restore stability in the state and ensurelower class minimal civil rights.
