The land of the peasants in Wrangel
Land reform is one of the central reforms of the government of P. N. Wrangel, which was carried out in the territories controlled by the Russian army in May-November of 1920. It was intended to remove the land issue by settling land management and land use relations.
The land issue was key during the Russian Civil War. But most of the leaders of the White movement temporarily ignored him, leaving it to the discretion of the supreme organs of the state after the end of the Civil War.
The exceptions were General P. N. Wrangel and his government. It was they who began to implement domestic policy on a different basis - abandoning "non-judgment" and actively engaging in state-building. The government of P. N. Wrangel put into effect a whole complex of legislative provisions concerning the organization of the peaceful life of the population in the territories under the control of the Russian army.
P.N. Wrangell
PN Wrangel was in a hurry with the land reform, which is not surprising, because the situation on the fronts of the Civil War was changing at lightning speed. The general demanded outstanding efforts from all those involved in this work, and he managed to ensure that officials worked at a truly "revolutionary" (in the good sense of the word) pace.
P.N. Wrangel recalled that at first the commission of senator G.V. Glinka (the former friend of the minister of agriculture and the head of the resettlement department) formed a special commission in Yalta (then moved to Simferopol). It included a number of specialists on the land issue (4 representative from the meeting of public figures of Yalta, managing directorates and departments of agriculture, land management and state property, provincial surveyor and head of the land surveying department and a number of other responsible specialists).
Senator G.V. Glinka, Managing Agriculture of the Government of Southern Russia, “Father” of the Wrangel Land Law
Stormy discussions ensued. Some demanded the gratuitous provision of landless and land-poor peasantry of all state-owned and privately owned land (estates), others claimed that “property is sacred”, and the constraint of large-scale land management would prevent the country's economic revival. The government came under fire from both sides. The commission was also divided. Resolving the land issue on an all-Russian scale, the commission considered itself not eligible, and was looking for a "golden mean" - limiting its tasks and outlining only certain activities and only within the Crimea (multi-land region), in relation to the specificity of the territory.
The commission drafted a project, according to which agricultural land was transferred to privately owned estates that were leased or not cultivated by the owners during the last 6 years. At the same time, each landowner was granted the right to retain to 200 tithes (in the state or regional farms, this rate was doubled) of land. The owners retained all the estate land, buildings and areas of valuable crops (the peasants also maintained allotment plots and land acquired with the assistance of the Peasant Bank).
Lands subject to alienation were to be determined immediately, but for a certain period of time (1 year) their voluntary alienation by the owners was allowed.
Lands that were not sold by the appropriate date were placed at the disposal of the government - for subsequent use as intended. The pre-emption right belonged to permanent tenants.
Implement the bill should have a special mediation commission.
The project caused objections - even within the commission itself. Thus, the chairman of the Tavrichesky provincial district council issued a special opinion consisting in the immediate transfer to the agricultural population not only of leased land from privately owned estates, but also of all unused areas of the last 3 of the year, with the right to keep the owners 100 tithe.
Thus, the commission did not find a universal solution to the land question and did not sufficiently radically meet the peasants ’ideas about the needs of land management.
But the peasantry (the main stronghold of the Russian statehood) and the army (which had to rely on the broad peasant masses) were waiting for the solution of the land question.
As P.N. Wrangel noted, newspapers with information about the work of the land commission penetrated the front line. And the peasants from Northern Tavria even made their way to Sevastopol. They notified the Russian Army command of the situation and waited for an answer to one question: how the new Commander-in-Chief assumes to resolve the issue of land.
The commander-in-chief summoned representatives of the local peasant unions and delegates from outside the front line — and in the course of a long conversation he clarified the ideas and wishes of the peasantry.
The peasants reported that the population of the localities from which they came (with the exception of lumpenized people) was very communal and Soviet. The peasants wanted to establish peace and order in the village — and await a full-fledged law on land and local government. And they wanted to get the maximum self-government - both in the matter of land management, and in the field of land management. While meeting their aspirations, the peasants declared to P. N. Wrangel, they recognize the cause of the Russian army as their own, popular and state.
“These conversations,” noted P.N. Wrangel, “finally strengthened me in my decision to meet the moods of the army and the population.” I immediately instructed Senator Glinka to prepare the land bill in the shortest possible time, definitely already pointing out to him the main reasons on which this bill should be drafted. ”
The situation was difficult - there was no law and order in the sphere of land use, devastation reigned. And it concerned both red and white territories.
Thus, the landowners, farm lands and part of the peasant allotment lands captured by the peasantry of Northern Tavria, which were not recognized by the Soviet authorities as the property of the owners (the majority of them were wealthy peasants) and largely granted by the so-called. "Poor country", was used far from fully. T. n. "State farms" (based on the basis of former large estates) - showed miserable economic results. They were in poor condition, the inventory was preserved in very limited quantities, the buildings were partially burned.
In the southern districts of the Tauride province, which were under the control of the Armed Forces of Southern Russia for about a year, the Regulation on rural county institutions, approved by A. I. Denikin, has not yet been fully implemented. The old territorial councils (provincial and district) have lost their former strength and relevance, land use and land tenure were fragile, there was plenty of empty land.
Together with the landowners, the revolutionary wave of small farmers and owners, farmers, shook tenant farms, carrying on the crest of scum - dark forces (the rural poor) - who, terrorizing the working population, served as the main stronghold of Soviet power.
It was necessary to urgently resolve the land issue, and 8 on April 1920 of P.N. Wrangel issued an order containing the following provisions:
1. Use all suitable for cultivation of the land - to endow them with the greatest possible number of peasants, really working people on the land.
2. All endowed with land should receive the last in the property in a lawful manner - for a ransom.
3. Local self-government bodies should carry out the reform with the widest possible participation of the peasantry itself.
Opinions of members of the council again divided. But P.N. Wrangel approved the project, and 25. 05. 1920 was made public:
1. Order of the land.
2. The rules of transfer of state, land bank and privately owned agricultural lands to the ownership of land owners.
3. Temporary position on land institutions.
The special government communication explained in detail the conditions and circumstances of the publication of the land law, the content and significance of the latter. The Land Order, the Rules and the Provisional Regulations to the Order were promulgated by decree of the Governing Senate.
The Senate proclaimed that the land is transferred to the working owners in the hereditary eternal property - but after paying the state its value for the calculation with the owners of the lands subject to alienation. A firm land order in the village and the economic security of the working people on the land must become the guarantee of a lasting peace, especially since the law will be implemented with the direct participation of the peasants themselves.
Questions of rent and so forth were resolved by additional orders.
The first paragraph of the law established that any ownership of land (regardless of the grounds of this right) is protected from seizures and other violence, and the land remains in the possession of the owners who use them - until changes are made in accordance with the law.
In accordance with the Order of the land, arable, haying and grazing lands (lands) of estates (state-owned, State Land Bank and surplus of privately owned estates), exceeding the established size of possession, kept for each owner, were transferred to the peasants - the working people on the land of these owners. The size of the plots retained by the owners was outlined for each parish by the relevant local land councils - and then approved by the authorities.
The exceptions were the estates (on the basis of which state farms were organized), in which Soviet managers previously managed the economy, as well as especially important cultural or industrial enterprises of state or regional importance. These farms were temporarily disposed of by the government — and they could be transferred to the treasury or local authorities. But even on these estates, it was necessary to transfer to the workers on this land, first of all, the rental fund, and then the land, recognized as superfluous to save this estate as an economic unit.
For the owners and tenants who had settled in the manor in the areas they were subject to alienation, the manor's land was inviolable - inviolable and inalienable.
State-owned forests remained at the disposal of the treasury, and privately owned forests were taken under the supervision of relevant government departments. At the same time, the local population was provided with the right to receive fuel and construction materials from privately owned forests, as required.
A number of land, as we see, was withdrawn from the rules on alienation, being preserved by the owners. These were land: 1) allotment; 2) acquired with the assistance of the Peasant Bank; 3) allocated to farms and cuts; 4) allotted to churches and parishes, as well as monastic and vakuf; 5) belonged to agricultural experimental, educational and scientific institutions and colleges; 6) included in the line of urban settlements, as well as being recognized as necessary for the expansion of these settlements; 7) belonged to urban settlements, even if they were not part of their line, if they served the needs of city offices; 8) intended for cultural and educational villages or for the settlement of military personnel; 9) manor, garden, artificial plantations, irrigated crops, gardens, and especially valuable crops, regardless of the form of ownership (with the exception of the above-mentioned manor places consisted in the use of owners and tenants); 10) under the mills, factories, factories and other industrial objects in the amount necessary for their work, as well as occupied by ancillary facilities and devices; 11) not included in the volosts if these lands belonged to the inalienable lands mentioned above; and in terms of agricultural land, they did not exceed the size of the land plot left to the owner upon alienating those from him.
The ending should ...
The land issue was key during the Russian Civil War. But most of the leaders of the White movement temporarily ignored him, leaving it to the discretion of the supreme organs of the state after the end of the Civil War.
The exceptions were General P. N. Wrangel and his government. It was they who began to implement domestic policy on a different basis - abandoning "non-judgment" and actively engaging in state-building. The government of P. N. Wrangel put into effect a whole complex of legislative provisions concerning the organization of the peaceful life of the population in the territories under the control of the Russian army.
P.N. Wrangell
PN Wrangel was in a hurry with the land reform, which is not surprising, because the situation on the fronts of the Civil War was changing at lightning speed. The general demanded outstanding efforts from all those involved in this work, and he managed to ensure that officials worked at a truly "revolutionary" (in the good sense of the word) pace.
P.N. Wrangel recalled that at first the commission of senator G.V. Glinka (the former friend of the minister of agriculture and the head of the resettlement department) formed a special commission in Yalta (then moved to Simferopol). It included a number of specialists on the land issue (4 representative from the meeting of public figures of Yalta, managing directorates and departments of agriculture, land management and state property, provincial surveyor and head of the land surveying department and a number of other responsible specialists).
Senator G.V. Glinka, Managing Agriculture of the Government of Southern Russia, “Father” of the Wrangel Land Law
Stormy discussions ensued. Some demanded the gratuitous provision of landless and land-poor peasantry of all state-owned and privately owned land (estates), others claimed that “property is sacred”, and the constraint of large-scale land management would prevent the country's economic revival. The government came under fire from both sides. The commission was also divided. Resolving the land issue on an all-Russian scale, the commission considered itself not eligible, and was looking for a "golden mean" - limiting its tasks and outlining only certain activities and only within the Crimea (multi-land region), in relation to the specificity of the territory.
The commission drafted a project, according to which agricultural land was transferred to privately owned estates that were leased or not cultivated by the owners during the last 6 years. At the same time, each landowner was granted the right to retain to 200 tithes (in the state or regional farms, this rate was doubled) of land. The owners retained all the estate land, buildings and areas of valuable crops (the peasants also maintained allotment plots and land acquired with the assistance of the Peasant Bank).
Lands subject to alienation were to be determined immediately, but for a certain period of time (1 year) their voluntary alienation by the owners was allowed.
Lands that were not sold by the appropriate date were placed at the disposal of the government - for subsequent use as intended. The pre-emption right belonged to permanent tenants.
Implement the bill should have a special mediation commission.
The project caused objections - even within the commission itself. Thus, the chairman of the Tavrichesky provincial district council issued a special opinion consisting in the immediate transfer to the agricultural population not only of leased land from privately owned estates, but also of all unused areas of the last 3 of the year, with the right to keep the owners 100 tithe.
Thus, the commission did not find a universal solution to the land question and did not sufficiently radically meet the peasants ’ideas about the needs of land management.
But the peasantry (the main stronghold of the Russian statehood) and the army (which had to rely on the broad peasant masses) were waiting for the solution of the land question.
As P.N. Wrangel noted, newspapers with information about the work of the land commission penetrated the front line. And the peasants from Northern Tavria even made their way to Sevastopol. They notified the Russian Army command of the situation and waited for an answer to one question: how the new Commander-in-Chief assumes to resolve the issue of land.
The commander-in-chief summoned representatives of the local peasant unions and delegates from outside the front line — and in the course of a long conversation he clarified the ideas and wishes of the peasantry.
The peasants reported that the population of the localities from which they came (with the exception of lumpenized people) was very communal and Soviet. The peasants wanted to establish peace and order in the village — and await a full-fledged law on land and local government. And they wanted to get the maximum self-government - both in the matter of land management, and in the field of land management. While meeting their aspirations, the peasants declared to P. N. Wrangel, they recognize the cause of the Russian army as their own, popular and state.
“These conversations,” noted P.N. Wrangel, “finally strengthened me in my decision to meet the moods of the army and the population.” I immediately instructed Senator Glinka to prepare the land bill in the shortest possible time, definitely already pointing out to him the main reasons on which this bill should be drafted. ”
The situation was difficult - there was no law and order in the sphere of land use, devastation reigned. And it concerned both red and white territories.
Thus, the landowners, farm lands and part of the peasant allotment lands captured by the peasantry of Northern Tavria, which were not recognized by the Soviet authorities as the property of the owners (the majority of them were wealthy peasants) and largely granted by the so-called. "Poor country", was used far from fully. T. n. "State farms" (based on the basis of former large estates) - showed miserable economic results. They were in poor condition, the inventory was preserved in very limited quantities, the buildings were partially burned.
In the southern districts of the Tauride province, which were under the control of the Armed Forces of Southern Russia for about a year, the Regulation on rural county institutions, approved by A. I. Denikin, has not yet been fully implemented. The old territorial councils (provincial and district) have lost their former strength and relevance, land use and land tenure were fragile, there was plenty of empty land.
Together with the landowners, the revolutionary wave of small farmers and owners, farmers, shook tenant farms, carrying on the crest of scum - dark forces (the rural poor) - who, terrorizing the working population, served as the main stronghold of Soviet power.
It was necessary to urgently resolve the land issue, and 8 on April 1920 of P.N. Wrangel issued an order containing the following provisions:
1. Use all suitable for cultivation of the land - to endow them with the greatest possible number of peasants, really working people on the land.
2. All endowed with land should receive the last in the property in a lawful manner - for a ransom.
3. Local self-government bodies should carry out the reform with the widest possible participation of the peasantry itself.
Opinions of members of the council again divided. But P.N. Wrangel approved the project, and 25. 05. 1920 was made public:
1. Order of the land.
2. The rules of transfer of state, land bank and privately owned agricultural lands to the ownership of land owners.
3. Temporary position on land institutions.
The special government communication explained in detail the conditions and circumstances of the publication of the land law, the content and significance of the latter. The Land Order, the Rules and the Provisional Regulations to the Order were promulgated by decree of the Governing Senate.
The Senate proclaimed that the land is transferred to the working owners in the hereditary eternal property - but after paying the state its value for the calculation with the owners of the lands subject to alienation. A firm land order in the village and the economic security of the working people on the land must become the guarantee of a lasting peace, especially since the law will be implemented with the direct participation of the peasants themselves.
Questions of rent and so forth were resolved by additional orders.
The first paragraph of the law established that any ownership of land (regardless of the grounds of this right) is protected from seizures and other violence, and the land remains in the possession of the owners who use them - until changes are made in accordance with the law.
In accordance with the Order of the land, arable, haying and grazing lands (lands) of estates (state-owned, State Land Bank and surplus of privately owned estates), exceeding the established size of possession, kept for each owner, were transferred to the peasants - the working people on the land of these owners. The size of the plots retained by the owners was outlined for each parish by the relevant local land councils - and then approved by the authorities.
The exceptions were the estates (on the basis of which state farms were organized), in which Soviet managers previously managed the economy, as well as especially important cultural or industrial enterprises of state or regional importance. These farms were temporarily disposed of by the government — and they could be transferred to the treasury or local authorities. But even on these estates, it was necessary to transfer to the workers on this land, first of all, the rental fund, and then the land, recognized as superfluous to save this estate as an economic unit.
For the owners and tenants who had settled in the manor in the areas they were subject to alienation, the manor's land was inviolable - inviolable and inalienable.
State-owned forests remained at the disposal of the treasury, and privately owned forests were taken under the supervision of relevant government departments. At the same time, the local population was provided with the right to receive fuel and construction materials from privately owned forests, as required.
A number of land, as we see, was withdrawn from the rules on alienation, being preserved by the owners. These were land: 1) allotment; 2) acquired with the assistance of the Peasant Bank; 3) allocated to farms and cuts; 4) allotted to churches and parishes, as well as monastic and vakuf; 5) belonged to agricultural experimental, educational and scientific institutions and colleges; 6) included in the line of urban settlements, as well as being recognized as necessary for the expansion of these settlements; 7) belonged to urban settlements, even if they were not part of their line, if they served the needs of city offices; 8) intended for cultural and educational villages or for the settlement of military personnel; 9) manor, garden, artificial plantations, irrigated crops, gardens, and especially valuable crops, regardless of the form of ownership (with the exception of the above-mentioned manor places consisted in the use of owners and tenants); 10) under the mills, factories, factories and other industrial objects in the amount necessary for their work, as well as occupied by ancillary facilities and devices; 11) not included in the volosts if these lands belonged to the inalienable lands mentioned above; and in terms of agricultural land, they did not exceed the size of the land plot left to the owner upon alienating those from him.
The ending should ...
Information