Preparations for Mining Reform in Russia in the 1860s: European Guidelines and Russian Realities
This article analyses the activity of two commissions, the Mining Commission and the Tax Commission, which operated in the 1860s under the Ministry of Finance in order to develop a draft reform of mining and metallurgical legislation of Russia. The author clarifies the role of various factors that influenced the adoption of decisions by members of the commissions, paying special attention to the importance of international experience. The article focuses on the views the participants of the discussion had regarding the prospects of private entrepreneurship in the mining industry and the use of the experience of Western European countries in addressing the issues of subsurface resource management, taxes, and the organisation of state supervision. It transpires that the Mining Commission relied in its proposals on the rules and institutions already existing in Russia, trying to give them a more European look, while the Tax Commission categorically rejected not only the domestic order, but also international experience if it did not comply with modern liberal ideas about freedom of enterprise. The differences in their approaches are explained by the composition of the members of both commissions. In the first Commission, which was composed of the higher echelons of the mining department, the basis for their proposed reform was their desire to reconcile the interests of the treasury and entrepreneurs. To this end, they sought to expand opportunities for private enterprise while maintaining professional supervision by a special mining department. In the second Commission, mostly represented by factory owners, liberal economists, and the “enlightened bureaucracy”, the interests of entrepreneurs came to the fore. This resulted in a focus on the complete elimination of sectoral governance, which was intended to lead to entrepreneurial freedom. Depending on the attitudes of Russian reformers to the development of the industry, they made different choices regarding legal and institutional innovations, either accepting or rejecting European experience. The author concludes that the choice of legal and institutional innovations and the adoption or rejection of European experience depended primarily on the ideas of Russian reformers about the development of the industry under the control or in the absence of the state.
Grammatchikov, V. A. (1870). Gornoe zakonodatel’stvo i gornaya administratsiya Anglii, Bel’gii, Frantsii, Avstrii i Prussii [Mining Legislation and the Mining Administration of England, Belgium, France, Austria, and Prussia]. St Petersburg, Tipografiya V. Bezobrazova i K°. 546 р.
Neklyudov, E. G. (2014). Vliyanie sistem gornogo prava na razvitie mirovoi metallurgii: vzglyad ural’skogo zavodchika [The Influence of Mining Law Systems upon the Development of World Metallurgy: The View of a Ural Manufacturer]. In Quaestio Rossica. No. 3, pp. 229–241.
Neklyudov, E. G. (2018). Gornaya reforma v Rossii vtoroi poloviny XIX – nachala XX v.: ot zamysla k realizatsii [Mining Reform in Russia in the Second Half of the 19th and Early 20th Centuries: From Concept to Implementation]. St Petersburg, Nestor ‒ Istoriya. 576 р.
Stof, A. A. (1896). Gornoe pravo. Sravnitel’noe izlozhenie gornykh zakonov, deistvuyushchikh v Rossii i glavneishikh gornopromyshlennykh gosudarstvakh Zapadnoi Evropy [Mining Law. A Comparative Description of Mining Laws in Russia and the Main Mining Countries of Western Europe]. St Petersburg, Tipografiya M. M. Stasyulevicha. 618 р.
Trudy Komissii, vysochaishe uchrezhdennoi dlya peresmotra sistemy podatei i sborov v 23 t. [Proceedings of the Commission Established to Review the System of Taxes and Fees. 23 Vols.]. (1868). Vol. 13. Part 3. Proekt Gornogo ustava, sostavlennyi osoboi Komissiei. Vol. 13. Part 4. Proekt Gornogo ustava, sostavlennyi obshchim sobraniem Komissii. St Petersburg, Tipografiya V. Bezobrazova i K°.