In television reports from certain meetings of our top leaders with high-ranking officials - ministers, governors, heads of major state corporations - you involuntarily pay attention to the replicas of top officials that are repeated from time to time.
For example, the president talks about the forest with Viktor Zubkov and instructs him to pay special attention to the mechanism for managing the forest fund. During a meeting with Education Minister Andrei Fursenko, Dmitry Medvedev drew the minister's special attention to schools from areas affected by forest fires. “I would like you to take this issue under special control,” the head of state said.
During a recent meeting with the governor of the Saratov region, the president pointed out to him: "We still have the old grain that lies, it also needs to be pulled out and, perhaps, renewed, a new one should be laid."
Usually, the term "manual control" is understood in our country as something else, but even these examples, if you look at it, can cause confusion and questions: and without the president, the Minister of Education was engaged on the eve of September 1 with some other, less acute and operational issues? Or: is it possible that the governor may not know that grain, in principle, needs to be changed - the old for the new, if the question concerns storage facilities, especially in the current dry and extraordinary year for some indicators?
The conversation of the Prime Minister is structured in approximately the same way. For example, in May, when the tragedy happened at the Raspadskaya mine, Vladimir Putin is holding a meeting on the spot: “Pay special attention to technical means, including personal means of rescuing miners.” Or - already recently, at a meeting on fires: “I draw special attention: as a result of the fires, many people have lost not only their property, but also all documents - passports, birth certificates, pension certificates, health insurance policies, documents for housing and motor transport ... The payment of pensions, other social benefits, and finally the very receipt of housing depend on the restoration of these securities. We need to take this under control too ”. In the spring, the top officials turn to the heads of the regions “once again with an urgent appeal - in the most serious way to pay attention to the spring flood,” closer to autumn - not to forget about winter crops. They especially note: "Wage arrears need to be paid ... Do not forget about it."
These are all very correct words. And, probably, when they are pronounced, it is implied that the listeners will appreciate the attention of the president and the prime minister to what is happening in the country and on the ground, and in all, even private, issues. But since the picture is usually limited to the "opening" and "closing" words, sometimes a natural bewilderment arises: and without the president in the region they can forget about paying wages? About forests? And without the chairman of the government - about winter crops?
From the point of view of "pictures" and PR, everything is probably correct: it is important to show what the president and prime minister are doing today, to give each of them an information story. But in the end, both of them - in the information field - appear as lonely titans and heroes who are forced to keep all the questions in their heads, remember everything, talk about everything.
Of course, it would be completely unnatural if the president or the prime minister paid the attention of, say, the minister of culture to winter crops or forests. Of course, talking with the Minister of Agriculture about winter crops is more appropriate and understandable.
But, probably, it is necessary to show the interlocutors from time to time, so that it becomes clear that they are also aware of some basic issues.
I S T O R I Z, A R X E O L O G I Z, E T N O G R A F I Z
UDC 94 (470.51) "18"
V. S. Vorontsov
"... PAY SPECIAL ATTENTION TO THE NECESSITY TO TAKE MEASURES TO RESTORATE LEGAL ORDER."
TO THE 120TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE END OF THE "MULTAN CASE" *
The collection of documents of the TsGA UR contains a selection of materials on the so-called "Multan case" - a false accusation of peasants-Udmurts p. Old Multan in a ritual human sacrifice. Despite numerous violations committed by the police and investigative authorities during the investigation of the crime, 7 out of 10 Udmurts involved in the case were found guilty and sentenced to hard labor. It is known that thanks to the intervention of V. G. Korolenko, A. F. Koni, V. I. Sukhodoev, P. M. Bogaevsky, F. A. Patenko, E. F. Bellin, and others, the case received an all-Russian resonance. By a special decree, the Senate overturned the court's decision, and a re-trial was appointed. However, only at the third trial, which took place from May 28 to June 4, 1896 in the town of Mamadysh, the defendants' lawyers managed to prove the illegality of the actions of the police and investigative officials, to expose the groundlessness of the conclusions of the medical and ethnographic "examination". As a result, all the convicted Udmurt peasants were acquitted. The uniqueness of the situation lies in the fact that the Senate, as the highest judicial body of the Russian Empire, twice overturned the court decisions in the Multan case. The article publishes the Report of the Ober-Prosecutor of the Criminal Cassation Department of the Governing Senate A. F. Koni to the Minister of Justice of the Russian Empire N. V. Muravyov, testifying to the numerous violations committed by the investigating authorities during the investigation of the Multan case. An explanatory article and comments are attached to the document.
Key words: Multan case, national policy, struggle against paganism, prejudices, falsifications, Senate, V. G. Korolenko, A. F. Koni.
* The article was prepared within the framework of the implementation of the State Task for educational institutions of higher education and scientific organizations subordinate to the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation, on the topic “Monitoring interethnic relations and the religious situation, analyzing the participation of state authorities, municipalities and civil society institutions in the implementation of the state national policy, migration and language policy of the Russian Federation in the regions of the Volga Federal District (the Republic of Udmurtia, Mari El, Mordovia, Chuvashia, Perm Territory) ".
June 2016 marked the 120th anniversary of the end of the trial in the so-called Multan case. Trial on False Accusation of Udmurt Peasants s. Old Multan of Malmyzhsky district of Vyatka province. (now the village of Korolenko, Kiznersky district of the UR) in making a human sacrifice to the pagan gods received in the middle. 1890s wide public response. Interest in him remains to this day.
The basis for initiating criminal prosecution was the discovery on May 5, 1892 of the body of a Russian beggar on the trail between the villages of Anik and Chulia. The investigation, which lasted almost two and a half years, was headed by assistant prosecutor of the Sarapul district court N. I. Raevsky. Relying on rumors and speculation, striving at all costs to prove the ritual nature of the crime, he and his subordinates committed numerous violations, including beatings of the accused, forgery of evidence, intimidation of witnesses, etc. Despite the obvious falsification of evidence, at a visiting session of the Sarapul District Court held in Malmyzh on December 10-11, 1894, 7 out of 10 Udmurts involved in the case were declared guilty. The defender of the Multans, the lawyer M.I.Dryagin, filed a cassation appeal with the Ministry of Justice - and the investigation revealed a number of omissions, incorrect and illegal actions of police and judicial officials. By a special decree, the Senate overturned the court's decision and appointed a new trial, in which it recommended involving professional experts - ethnographers and doctors.
A new trial took place on September 29 - October 1, 1895 in Yelabuga and again ended with a guilty verdict. VG Korolenko, AN Baranov and VI Su-khodoev, who were present as correspondents of the newspaper "Vyatskiy Kray", recorded the entire course of the trial in shorthand. Publishing a report on the Multan trial, V. G. Korolenko called on the advanced part of Russian society to come to the aid of the peasants. Famous scientists P.N.Luppov, P.M.Bogayevsky, V.K. Magnitsky in the press and speeches pointed to the absence of ethnographic data, testifying to human sacrifice among the Udmurts. After a comprehensive analysis of the materials of the primary medical examination, leading experts in the field of forensic medicine F.A.Patenko and E.F. Bellin declared the prosecution's conclusions untenable.
On a new complaint by defense counsel M.I.Dryagin, the Senate ordered a third trial. At the trial (May 28 - June 4, 1896 in the town of Mamadysh), the defendants' lawyers M.I.Dryagin, V.G.Korolenko, P.M.Krasnikov and N.P. Karabchevsky succeeded in exposing the illegal actions of the police during the preliminary investigation and prove the groundlessness of the conclusions of the medical and scientific "expertise". The defendants were acquitted.
Unfortunately, for multinational Russia, the Multan case was not unique. The practice of fabricating "ritual processes", fed by medieval legends about human sacrifice, became widespread during the period of the Nikolaev reaction. It was then that the fight against paganism became the official course of the government. In 1848-1852 and 1854-1854. Investigations were carried out over the peasants of the village of Novaya Biya and the village of Pazyal-Zhikyi, Malmyzhsky district, accused of ritual murder. Great fame
also acquired the Saratov case (1853), in which the accusation of human sacrifice was brought against Jews and Germans. In the conditions of a multinational country, the fabrication of "ritual deeds" gave rise to rumors and rumors, prejudices and distrust among the Russian population in relation to "foreigners".
The acquittal in the Multan case was a brilliant victory for the progressive Russian public, whose representatives took an active part in the fate of the slandered Multans, and in their person - in the fate of the entire Udmurt people. One of them was A.F. Koni, at that time the Chief Prosecutor of the Criminal Cassation Department of the Governing Senate. He was a man of liberal views, he became known to the general public in 1878 as a judge who acquitted the revolutionary terrorist Vera Zasulich. Thanks to his high professionalism, especially in the field of criminal proceedings, A. F. Koni enjoyed great prestige in society. It was for his consideration that the complaint of M.I.Dryagin fell, and with his submission the Senate overturned the court's indictment. At the insistence of A.F. Koni, the sentence passed at the second trial was also canceled.
Recalling this case, AF Koni wrote: “The second cancellation of the conviction in the Votyak case aroused considerable displeasure in the St. Petersburg official spheres. At the first official meeting with me, the Minister of Justice Muravyov expressed to me his bewilderment about the too strict attitude of the Senate to the violations committed by the court and said about the predicament he would be put in if the sovereign paid attention to the fact that the same court the same case was sentenced twice, to be overturned. And that such a question could be put to him, Muravyov concluded from the fact that Pobedonostsev, who had far from lost his influence then, could in no way reconcile himself with the decision of the Senate in general, or especially with the place of my imprisonment, where I said that the recognition of the defendants by those guilty of human sacrifice to the pagan gods must be committed in full compliance with all forms and rites of legal proceedings<...>... I think - I told him that in this case your answer may consist in a simple indication that the court of cassation was established precisely in order to overturn sentences passed in violation of the fundamental conditions of justice, no matter how many times these violations are repeated. " ...
In the Collection of copies of documents on the history of Udmurtia, revealed in the state archives, museums and libraries of Russia (f. R-1655) there is a case on charges of peasants-Udmurts of the village of Stary Multan for 1895, which came to the archive from the Russian State Archive in the form of a photocopy in 2000 It contains the report of the Chief Prosecutor of the Criminal Cassation Department of the Governing Senate AF Koni to the Minister of Justice NV Muravyov dated March 28, 1895, in which he describes in detail the events that took place in Multan and analyzes the course of the investigation, recording numerous omissions. wrong and illegal actions of both policemen and judicial officials.
The report was written in black ink, neat, large handwriting. There is a resolution on the first page of the document, underlines and margins in black ink, cursive. Their authorship has not been established.
We publish it in full. The text complies with modern spelling rules, but retains the stylistic features of the original. Abbreviations and incomplete words encountered in the original have been restored and reproduced in brackets. Uncollected words are marked with a dash. The resolution is reproduced after the text of the document, notes - in footnotes. The editorial text is in italics.
In addition to the report, the case contains a copy of the conclusion on the termination of the investigation on the peasants of the village of Stary Multan, accused of murder for the purpose of sacrifice, dated July 27, 1894, as well as a copy from a copy of the resolution of the Sarapul District Court of October 1, 1895 with a jury questionnaire assessors. They are not published.
Introductory article, preparation of the text for publication and comments to. And. n. V.S. Vorontsov.
Report of the Ober-Prosecutor of the Criminal Cassation Department of the Government Senate A. Koni to the Minister of Justice, Privy Councilor and Knight N. V. Muravyov
On August 24, 1894, by the decision of the Kazan Court of Justice (consisting of the chairman L.I. Grass and members B.V. Onufrovich, S.D.Babushkin, V.I.Barmaleev, I.I. Fursenko, B. B. Bera according to report of B.V.Onufrovich, in the presence of assistant prosecutor N.F. Miller), the indictment was approved by the assistant prosecutor of the Sarapul district court Raevsky, on the trial with the participation of jurors of the peasants of the village of Stary Multan, Sarapul district: Andrian Andreev,
38 years old, Dmitry Stepanov, 31 years old, Andriana Alexandrova, 43 years old, Kuzma Samsonova, 40 years old, Vasily Kondratyev, 37 years old, Semyon Ivanova, 50 years old, Vasily Kuzmina Kuznetsov,
39 years old, Andrei Grigoriev, 90 years old, Alexander Efimov, 60 years old, Timofey Gavrilov, 35 years old and Maxim Gavrilov, 31 years old, on charges of committing murder, with a deliberate intention, on the night of May 5, 1895, a peasant from the village. Konon Matyunin's factories, with the aim of sacrificing him to the pagan gods of vot.
On the basis of the decision of the jury, the judgment of the Sarapul District Court, held on December 10-11, 1894 (composed of the presiding member of the court N.A. Goritsky, members of the court N.N. Olshamovsky, honorary magistrate Batuev, with the participation of the assistant prosecutor N.A. N. Raevsky), found guilty of the murder of kr-na Matyunin, with the purpose of sacrifice to the pagan gods of the vot, the peasants: Andrian Andreev, Dmitry Stepanov, Kuzma Samsonov, Vasily Kondratyev, Semyon Ivanov, Vasily Kuznetsov and Andrei Grigoriev and awarded according to the 1st part of 1454 , 2 tbsp. 19 Art. bed. about nak. *, 828 st. at.s. **, 4 tbsp. 19 Art. bed. about nak. to deprivation of all rights of the state and exile to hard labor for 10 years, with the replacement of this punishment, according to 74 Art. bed. about nak., for Andrey Grigoriev, a reference to a settlement in remote places in Siberia. The rest of the accused in this case were found acquitted by the court.
* Code of Criminal and Correctional Punishments 1845 - codification of criminal law in pre-revolutionary Russia. As amended in 1885, it was in effect until 1917.
** The Charter of Criminal Proceedings - adopted within the framework of the judicial reform of 1864. Established liberal principles for the consideration of criminal cases by the courts (jury, adversarial proceedings, etc.).
Considered in all details, on my instructions, this case and. D. Comrade Prosecutor General Koptev, preparing him for a report to the Governing Senate, brought to my attention that he saw in the case a number of omissions, incorrect and clearly illegal actions both on the part of police officials and officials of the judicial department who took part in the production of this case from the moment of its occurrence and until its resolution.
May 6, 1892, on a forest path from the village. Chulyi in the village. Anik was found the corpse of an unknown person without a head, a twelve-year-old girl, Martha Goloviznina, who was passing by in the morning. On May 7, a police sergeant Sokovikov arrived at the scene of the incident, upon notification from Goloviznina's parents, and began an inquiry. Seeing from the documents in the bag found at the crime scene that the body belongs to a peasant] s. Plant Nyrtov Matyunin, and, without drawing up a protocol of inspection of the surrounding area and the position of the body, the police officer reported on May 7 about the found body to the forensic investigator of the 2nd section. Malmyzhsky district, adding that the head and the entrails removed from the chest cavity were not found and cut out, as can be assumed, according to the superstition of Votyaks or treasure hunters, and he cannot determine whether the head was cut off during life or after the death of a found person.
On May 9, the bailiff of the 3rd camp of the Malmyzhsky district reported the same to the investigator, who on the 10th of the same month arrived at the place and made an external examination of the body, according to which it turned out that the head had been cut off with the neck almost at the very shoulders, caked blood could be seen in the chest cavity , while there was no blood around the body, and several small scabs were noticed on the stomach, covered with caked blood. The body was dressed in peasant clothes, and the legs were shod in bast shoes, but their ropes seemed loosely tightened, there was a knapsack behind the shoulders, a little blood was noticed on the collar of the shirt and zipun. Near the corpse was found a cross with a cut off rope and several strands of light brown, curly hair with torn off parts of the skin.
Having learned from popular rumor that 40 years later, the Votyaks are making sacrifices of a person whose head and heart are cut out for praying by the Votyaks, the police officer Timofeev drew attention to the neighboring half-cattle village of Stary Multan and began a search there, and in the courtyard of the peasant Moisey Dmitriev he found a trough stained with blood, and a canopy with blood stains in the crate. Without drawing up on this occasion a special protocol of seizure, in the manner prescribed by 258 Art. u.s., and without making a detailed examination of these things, the police officer took them to the case and proceeded to examine the public hut, arranged for the prayers of the votiaks at the back of Dmitriev's courtyard, and drew attention to the moisture of the earthen floor in its middle, and therefore at the same time he decided to take the peasant Moisey Dmitriev into custody. On May 13, the police officer forwarded to the investigator the general protocol of inquiry drawn up about the above.
The report of the police sergeant to the name of the investigating magistrate, sent on May 7, is not marked with the number of its receipt, the notification of the bailiff on May 9 is listed as received by the investigator on May 13.
The same number, etc. Investigator Kazansky drew up a resolution on the acceptance of the case for proceedings on the communication of the bailiff dated May 9, No. 481, and in the same resolution there is an order to invite the county doctor for an autopsy on May 15 and to declare in force the preventive measure taken against Dmitriev by the police officer of detention under arrest, pending clarification of the situation- *
On May 14, the forensic investigator received a telegram from the district doctor Minkevich with the following content: "I will not arrive on the thirteenth, I will notify you with your attitude." The promised notification, however, is not in the case, what reasons prevented the doctor from appearing when summoned by the investigator is unknown and the telegram did not summon any orders from the investigator *.
May 17 and. D. forensic investigator Kazansky arrived in the village. Multan, but limited himself to only the following few investigative actions: an inspection of a worldly prayer hut in the courtyard of the Andreevs. At the same time, by inspection, it was found that both in that and in the other hut the ground on the floor was damp. Without finding out the reasons for this circumstance, which may be quite natural, the forensic investigator took several handfuls of earth from the surface of the floor for research and, having dug out the ground in which the remains of animal bones were found, he limited himself. It is confirmed by the protocols of the forensic investigator that nothing more suspicious was found, meanwhile, from the following it is clear that the same hut was examined three more times at different times (July 2, 1892, August 16, 1893 and August 17, 1893) and each time, hair was found that was examined and appeared in court as material evidence.
Having interrogated several witnesses on May 18 and 19, of which only one witness, Shcherbakov, was questioned on the 19th, and so on. forensic investigator Kazansky did not conduct any external examination of the dead body, nor the surrounding area, nor those objects (trough and canopy) with traces of blood seen on them by the police officer, did not interrogate the arrested person, in direct violation of Art. u.u.s., bailiff of the peasant Moisey Dmitriev and, as it should be assumed, left the village. Multan, having suspended further investigation for reasons unknown, at the same time ordered the police officer to deliver the said material evidence to his cell, which was executed on June 2.
On May 29, the investigator asked the police officer to inquire in writing: which of the persons performing the rituals of sacrifices in the public huts of the peasants of the Votyaks s. Multan, enjoys the greatest influence in matters of their religious beliefs and diligently attends the said prayers.
Then, on May 30, the forensic investigator received a telegram from the district doctor Minkevich, attached to the case, with the following content: “I returned today, Multan will arrive the fourth, do you agree?”. Presumably, the investigator expressed his consent, since on June 4, the autopsy of the dead body in his presence took place at the place of his location, i.e. a month after it was discovered.
From the act of forensic medical research of June 4, 1892, it is first learned that the dead body of the peasant Matyunin was left in the forest, laid in a freshly dug hole. The same act states that the corpse was found stripped during a police examination, which is not evident from the police inquiry. The degree of rottenness of the body is not mentioned in the act. The forensic investigator, contrary to the instructions given in the decision of the general meeting of the cassation departments of the Government Senate in 1882 (No. 49), did not draw up a special protocol of examination and autopsy of the body on his own behalf, and after the autopsy left the village. Multana. Meanwhile, the police officer, who conducted the inquiry at the above-mentioned proposal of the judicial investigator, on June 3, 1892, that is, on the eve of the autopsy of the body, arrested the peasants from. Multan Mikhail Titov, Andrian Andreev, Semyon Yakovlev, Dmitry Stepanov, Trofim Maksimov, Stepan Petrov and Ilya Terentyev on the basis of information provided to him by the volost foreman that Mikhail Titov told him in a private conversation that Matyunin had been stabbed to death
* In the fields of the litter: According to [asno] telegrams ... the doctor was in the county.
either in the public hut of Moisey Dmitriev, or in the hut of Semyon Ivanov, in which the peasants took part: Andrei Grigoriev, Alexander Efimov, Timofey and Maxim Gavrilov, the rest belong to the most influential persons among the Votyaks and take part in their religious rituals.
The autopsy was carried out three miles from the village. Multan, the autopsy was attended by attesting witnesses invited from the same village, therefore it seems unlikely that the investigator did not know about what was happening in Multan on the eve of the autopsy, meanwhile the bailiff's inquiry about the above was marked as received by the investigator on June 10, 1892. *
Despite the fact that the inquest of the police officer did not contain any other data for the accusation of seven people who were arrested by him without sufficient grounds, and. D. forensic investigator Kazansky, with the receipt of this inquiry, did not
no order in respect of the detainees and slowed down his departure to produce
investigation leadership **.
On June 15, he interrogated the local volost chief Stepan Popugaev in the village of Staro Tryku. The detained by the order of the police officer Moisey Dmitriev from May 10 and the remaining seven people from June 3, who were kept in the same village under the local volost government, were left by the investigator and this time without interrogation. After interrogating the volost foreman, the investigator apparently left the said village, since during the period from 15 to 20 June he did not undertake any investigative actions in the named case. At the indicated date, the investigator interrogated the peasant] der. Kuznerki Nikolai Sannikov in his cell and on the same date for the first time inspected the things sent by the police: troughs and canopy, taken from Dmitriev, who found that they only had blood stains ***.
How carefully this examination was carried out can be seen from the fact that when these objects were sent by the forensic investigator on September 15, 1892 to the medical department, then an examination of them, carried out during the opening of the bale, revealed a bundle of short red hair adhered to the walls of the trough *** *.
It should be noted that the admitted slowness of sending these items for the chemical-microscopic examination of stains in the medical department made it impossible to determine whether the blood belongs to a human or a mammal, since by the time of the study the blood balls had changed their shape and size.
On June 28, 1892, the investigator ordered the prosecution of the peasants of the village of Multan of the Vot tribe: Moisey Dmitriev, Stepan Petrov, Dmitry Stepanov, Mikhail Titov, Trofim Maksimov, Semyon Yakovlev, as defendants in the murder of Konon Matyunin, to sacrifice him to the pagan gods, Andrian Andreev, Maxim Gavrilov, Alexander Efimov, Timofey Gavrilov, Ilya Terentyev, Andrian Alexandrov and Semyon Ivanov. Of these, according to the protocols of the investigator, they appear to have been interrogated on the same June 28 in S.-Tryku village: Moisey Dmitriev, Stepan Petrov, Mikhail Titov, Alexander Efimov, Timofey Gavrilov, Ilya Terentyev, Andrey Grigoriev and Dmitry Stepanov. The rest were interviewed on July 29, and by the same number, unless it was a mistake of the person who wrote the minutes, a resolution was drawn up (with an amendment in its number from 28 to 29) on the adoption against Moisey Dmitriev, Dmitry Stepanov, Stepan
* In the margin of the litter: The bailiff was not present.
** In the margin of the litter: Autopsy result. Testimony of Popugaev, to whom Titov spoke. The position of the [s].
*** In the fields of the litter: What else could be on them?
Petrov and Mikhail Titov, to prevent ways to evade trial, to keep them under guard in a prison castle and to establish police oversight over the rest.
Thus, Moisei Dmitriev, detained by the bailiff on May 10, was held without interrogation until June 28, 1892, Mikhail Titov, Andrian Andreev, Semyon Yakovlev, Dmitry Stepanov, Trofim Maksimov, Stepan Petrov and Ilya Terentyev, detained by the bailiff on June 3, were interrogated on June 28 and July 29th.
According to the acts of the preliminary investigation, it is impossible to establish whether there is a simple mistake in the protocols of the interrogation of the named persons of the 29th day and in the decision of the same date, or indeed, these persons were interrogated not in June, but in July, and this circumstance can only be clarified by an investigation *.
At the same time, State Councilor Koptev cannot fail to notice that some circumstances testify in favor of the assumption that these persons were interrogated, and the decision on the measure of suppression of ways to evade the court was drawn up only in July, since in the heading of the latest protocols, Unlike the first, it is not mentioned that the accused were interrogated in accordance with the decision of the same June 28, as mentioned in the first, then it should be noted that during the month of July no other investigative steps were taken in the present case. In addition, two of the last accused, Andrian Aleksandrov and Semyon Ivanov, are shown interrogated elsewhere, namely in the village of Old Multan.
It was mentioned above that the public hut for prayer prayers in the courtyard of Moisey Dmitriev was inspected on May 13, 1892 by a police officer and on May 17 by a judicial investigator, after which, judging by the minutes of the investigation, it is not visible that it was sealed and access to it to unauthorized persons was blocked. Meanwhile, on July 4, the police officer forwarded to the investigator a new report on the inspection of this hut on July 2, which he had drawn up, taken, as can be seen from the protocol itself, on the basis that during the autopsy on Matyunin's legs, injuries were noticed that could have occurred from hanging his body. During this inspection, a bailiff found a lock of cut hair on one of the beams, which, according to the said official, was similar to the hair found at the location of the corpse **.
Only on August 10, 1892 the forensic investigator examined and compared this hair with the hair found near the corpse, and it was stated that between the latter there were gray hairs, which is not in the hair found in the hut.
More than a month later, on September 23, 1892, under No. 902, the forensic investigator sent these hairs for examination to the medical department of the Vyatka provincial government ***. From the report of the medical department it is clear that the hair was received from the investigator in two bags: No. 1 - with the inscription: "Hair found on the corpse of Konon Matyunin" and No. 2 - with the inscription: "Hair found in Dmitriev's hut." Among the latter, in the amount of 97 hairs, according to the conclusion of the medical department, 5 hairs belong to humans, the rest to animals, moreover, these 5 hairs do not belong to the person from whom the hair was removed, contained in a package under No. 1.
More than a year later after the last inspection of the worldly hut located in Dmitriev's courtyard, namely on August 16, 1893, the police officer of the 4th camp of Malmyzhsky
* In the margin of the litter: It is quite clear on June 29, for ... of this protocol, correspondence was received on July 9.
county again inspected the same hut, without explaining the reasons for such an examination, and in it he found two tables with traces of blood, and on the upper crossbar, in the very place where hair had been found before, another thin, long stuck to a tree red hair and a few small hairs.
Following that, on August 17, 1893, and. forensic investigator Kazansky, in the presence of assistant prosecutor Raevsky, again inspected the same hut and saw a few more white thin hairs on the same crossbar, which he did not draw up a resolution on and whose size he did not describe *.
On September 15, the forensic investigator sent for examination and comparison with the hair of the late Matyunin, to the Vyatka medical department of a hair, it is not known when and by whom found and precisely undescribed by him.
Only in the act of the medical department is a proper, accurate description of these hairs, and it turns out that there were only three of them, of which: one was long red and two gray. By examining and comparing these hairs with those found on the corpse, the medical department found that one of the three gray hairs belongs to a person and is similar in structure to Matyunin's hair. Thus, the above study, as it were, created a new piece of evidence against the accused, based on a hair found in a worldly hut a year and three months after Matyunin's murder.
The lack of exact information in the case of exactly which hairs, when and where they were taken, were examined in this case, gave reason for the defense lawyer to ask the court for clarification: where did the gray hair, similar to Matyunin's hair, come from, but the court could not give any explanation on this matter, meanwhile, in the closing speech, according to the defense lawyer, the presiding officer mentioned this, as he put it, a treacherous hair, and this circumstance is not rejected by the court's explanation.
In addition to the described wrong actions during the investigation that was carried out slowly, with long intervals of time, other omissions are also seen from the case.
So, one cannot but pay attention to the fact that and. forensic investigator Kazansky inspected the area in which Matyunin's corpse was found only as a result of a written proposal by assistant prosecutor Raevsky on January 10, 1893, on the 13th of that month, i.e. 8 months after the murder was discovered.
On January 14, 1893, he examined the blood stains on the clothes of the kr [isyan] on Kuzma Samsonov (a butcher by profession) **, brought into the case as an accused on December 2, 1892, sent by a police officer with a report from the 1st
the same December ***, which, however, is not at all in the case, and the circumstances under which the clothes were taken from Samsonov are established only by interrogating the police officer Sakovikov, who testified that he had traveled to the village on behalf of the assistant prosecutor. Multan to inspect Samsonov's house and there, in the absence of the latter, on November 30, 1892, he found his shirt and pants covered in blood.
At the suggestion of assistant prosecutor Raevsky on January 10, 1893, the accused Stepan Petrov and Mikhail Titov, who had been taken into custody by the bailiff, were released under special police supervision, but on July 31 of the same year, the bailiff of the 4th camp again arrested the same Mikhail Titov, on that the grounds that he confessed to the murder of Matyunin. The police officer did the same with the accused Semyon Ivanov, who was left at large. Drawn up on the order,
* The paragraph is highlighted in the margins with two parallel lines.
with the inquiry of the bailiff, were received by the judicial investigator on August 5, 1893, but they did not promptly summon any orders from him *.
Only on the 17th of the same August, the investigator arrived in the village. Multan and, after questioning Semyon Ivanov, ordered his detention. Mikhail Titov was by that time released from arrest by order of the bailiff himself.
The investigation that began on May 13, 1892 in this case, thanks to the slowness that the investigating magistrate discovered, was completed only in June 1894.
When sending this case, assistant prosecutor of the Sarapul District Court, Raevsky, drew up an indictment against the above-named persons and a conclusion on the termination of the investigation on charges of Moisei Dmitriev and his wife Vasilisa for their death, Stepan Petrov, Ilya Terentyev, Trofim Maksimov, Semyon Yakovlev and Mikhail Titov in view of the fact that they were all involved in the case as defendants on the sole basis that they performed in the village. Multans are the duties of priests, and Mikhail Titov, in addition, because he contributed to the disclosure of the murder and its perpetrators and should be the main witness in this case.
The named Mikhail Titov, summoned as a witness, but at the trial did not justify the hopes placed on him and stated, as the court record assures, that the testimony given by him during the investigation was forced by beatings and torture by the police officer.
Referring to the indictment drawn up by the assistant prosecutor of the Sarapul District Court, State Counselor Koptev finds that it does not contain a completely accurate and correct presentation of the material collected by the preliminary investigation, and even some distortion of circumstances to the detriment of the defendants. So, for example: regarding the trough and canopy found at Moisei Dmitriev's, the act states that "according to research in the medical department, the blood both in the trough and on the canopy turned out to be from mammals," meanwhile, from the message of the medical department on the name of the investigator can be seen that due to the destruction of the blood globules, the origin of the spots on the canopy cannot be determined. Further in the act it is said that on two crossbars, along the entire worldly hut for praying in the courtyard of Dmitriev, many hairs from animals were found, including one hair, according to the study of the medical department, quite similar to Matyunin's hair adhered to his corpse, but at the same time, it is silent about when, under what circumstances and by whom the hair was discovered, while the totality of these particular data completely undermines the significance of this evidence. Further, citing the data collected by the investigation in relation to the accused Kuzma Samsonov, the assistant prosecutor enters the following into the indictment: “As for the latter, from the very moment of Matyunin's murder, there was a persistent rumor among the people that Kuzma Samsonov had killed the beggar (Matyunin), known for the best butcher in Old Multan. " Then he makes sure that during a search in his house a shirt and trousers with blood stains were found, while keeping silent that the said clothes were taken by a police officer in the house of Kuzma Samsonov on November 30, 1892, that is, seven months after it was committed the crime. It goes on to say that the witness Aleksey Ivanovich Stukov confirmed that Kuzma Samsonov confessed to him in the murder of Matyunin, keeping silent about the circumstances under which this took place according to the witness's own explanation, which takes away all faith in the veracity of his testimony, etc.
Regardless of this, one cannot express extreme surprise that in this case, which goes beyond the ordinary in the very way of depriving a person's life and
* From the words but on July 31 to the words of the police officer, the paragraph in the margins is in square brackets (l. 29).
the expert doctor did not summon the expert doctor to the court session to clarify the charges brought against the defendants. This is all the more incomprehensible that in the conclusion of the doctor who performed the autopsy of Matyunin's body, there is no explanation for the scabs with caked blood on the deceased's stomach described in the protocol of the external examination of the body by the bailiff, which are described in the doctor's report as brownish specks, as if burnt and penetrating into subcutaneous tissue. Meanwhile, the presence of these specks, apparently, is connected with the stories cited in the indictment about how the Votyaks extract blood from their victims during prayers.
At the same time, one cannot but express regret that the prosecuting authority, starting with the assistant prosecutor of the district court who oversaw the investigation, and ending with the court chamber, which approved the indictment, did not come to the aid of the investigator, who in vain was looking for a knowledgeable person in religious beliefs of the Votyaks, in the types of coverage of the material collected by the investigation and the elimination from the case of everything that is not justified by scientific research. Whereas on the issue of the religious beliefs of the Votyaks, breaking up into many separate tribes and religious unions, and in particular the Votyaks of the Sarapul district, there is a whole literature (Bogaevsky's "Essays on the life of the Sarapul Votyaks", Smirnov's "Votyaks", Ostrovsky's "Votyaks of the Kazan province", Vereshchagin “Votyaki of the Sarapul district, Pervukhin, etc.).
From the above, it is seen that, despite the clearly incorrect and even directly illegal actions and. e. forensic investigator 2 uch. Malmyzhsky uyezd of Kazansky on the preliminary investigation in a case of particular importance, the Kazan Court of Justice, transferring the accused to the court, did not pay due attention to them and, by its determination of August 24, 1894, recognized the investigation as carried out without violating the essential forms and rituals of legal proceedings.
Finally, we cannot but touch upon what happened in the court session in the case of the murder of Konon Matyunin, about the content of the complaint filed by the defense lawyer of the defendants, private attorney Dryagin, in addition to the cassation appeal on March 10th. If what is described in it is exaggerated, then in any case, much finds confirmation in the proceedings itself and in the explanations presented by the court based on the remarks on the minutes of the court session.
So, for example, it seems in the case undoubted and sufficiently proven that at the trial too wide scope was given to any unverified rumors about the event of the crime and the beliefs of the Votiaks that the requirement of 718 Art. u.y.s. it was not fulfilled that the presiding judge in the present case reveals insufficient knowledge of the case, having made erroneous explanations to the jury about the material evidence and the results of their examination, that the court did not take dependent and absolutely necessary measures to clarify the question raised by the defense about when, by whom and under what circumstances the hair, which was examined by the medical department, was attached to the case as material evidence.
Fully sharing the considerations expressed by the State Councilor Koptev about a number of wrong, illegal and, in the sense of unjust, outstanding actions committed in this case, I instructed him to draw in my opinion before the Governing Senate the special attention of the highest court to the necessity, according to 534 Art. u.y.s. and 249, 249.1 and 250 Art. uchr. court. mouth., taking measures to restore the order that was not enforced by the Chamber of law in the case and, at the same time, I consider it my duty to present all of the above for the consideration of Your Excellency, adding that the case is heard in the Governing Senate on April 15 and that
“... Pay particular attention to the need for action ......._ ^^^
the following resolution will be presented to you immediately in addition to this submission.
And about. Chief Prosecutor A. Koni
TsGA UR. F.R-1655. Op. 3.D. 62.L. 4-40. Manuscript. Copy. RGIA. F. 1405. Op. 96. D. 5606. L. 1-18 ob. Manuscript. Script.
Resolution: Now, with the prescription of what is stated in the report, demand detailed information from the prosecutor of the Kazan court [court], from. - an explanation from comrade [arishch] pro [uroor] Sarapulsky about [circle] s [ud] Raevsky, prosecutor Sarap [ulsky] about [round] s [uda] and comrade. Pro [urora] of the Kazan court [of the court] fell [aty] Miller on the occasion of the wrong actions committed in the proceedings. 30th of March*.
NOTES
1. Vinberg A. I. Black dossier of expert falsifiers. M., 1990; Vanyushev V. M. Keen blinders "ybyle" Multan already? Izhevsk, 1994; Bunya M.I.Korolenko in Udmurtia. Izhevsk: Udmurtia, 1995; Sheptalin A. The legal aspect of the Multan case in Udmurtia // New wave in the study of the ethnopolitical history of the Volga-Ural region. Sat. articles / Ed. K. Matsuzato. Sapporo 2003 S. 225-262; Multan Business: History and Modern View. Materials of the scientific and practical conference. Izhevsk: UIIYAL UB RAS, 2000; History of Udmurtia: Late 15th - early 20th century. Izhevsk: UIIYAL UB RAS, 2004.
2. Horses AF On the path of life. Coll. op. T. 5, L., 1929.S. 296-297.
Received July 27, 2016
"... Pay Particular Attention to the Necessity of Taking Action
on Legal Order Restoration on the Case ... ".
On the 120th Anniversary of the End of the Multan Case
The collection of documents kept in the Central State Archive of the Republic of Udmurtia includes a selection of materials on the so-called "The Multan Case" which was false accusation of Udmurt peasants living in the village of Stary Multan of Malmyzhsky District in Vyatka Gubernia for making human sacrifices. Despite numerous violations committed by police and investigating authorities during crime investigation, seven of ten Udmurts involved in the case were found guilty and sentenced to hard labor. This case caused a huge national outcry owing to the Russian public representatives V. G. Korolenko, A. F. Koni, V. I. Sukho-doev, P. M. Bogayevsky, F. A. Patenko, E. F. Bellin, and others. The Senate issued a special decree falsifying the judgment and ordering a retrial. However, only in the third trial, which took place from May 28 to June 4, 1896 in the town of Mamadysh, the defendants "lawyers could prove the illegality of the actions taken by police and investigating authorities and could expose groundlessness of the conclusions of the medical and ethnographic "expertise". As a
* Signature missing.
result, all the prisoners were justified. The situation is unique as the Senate, the highest judicial authority of the Russian Empire, twice falsified a judgment on the Multan case. The article presents Chief Prosecutor at the Criminal Cassation Department of the Senate AF Cony "s report to NV Muraviev, the Minister of Justice of the Russian Empire. The report described numerous violations made by investigating authorities during the investigation of the Multan case. Explanatory article and comments are attached to the document.
Keywords: Multan case, national policy, fight against paganism, superstitions, falsifications, Senate, V. G. Korolenko, A. F. Koni.
Vorontsov Vladimir Stepanovich,
candidate of Historical Sciences, Senior Researcher, Udmurt Institute of History, Language and Literature, Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences 426004, Russia, Izhevsk, st. Lomonosov, 4 E-mail: [email protected]
Vorontsov Vladimir Stepanovich,
Candidate of Sciences (History), Senior Research Associate, Udmurt Institute of History, Language and Literature of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences 426004, Russia, Izhevsk, Lomonosov St., 4 E-mail: [email protected]
What to look for when purchasing a swimsuit
In addition to the fact that the swimsuit must fit your figure, there are other requirements for it. The first of these, of course, is quality. If the edges of the selected model are unevenly folded, the machine stitch “twists,” or threads stick out in at least one place - no need to buy! Even if you really liked the color or style, give up a low-quality swimsuit: most likely, inexpensive dyes were used for the fabric, and there is no guarantee that the drawing will not "float" after several sea baths. See affordable and high-quality swimwear here http://www.cupalnik.ru/.
Take special care when choosing swimwear made from white fabric. As you know, when it gets wet, it begins to shine through, and this is fraught with the strongest embarrassment for you. A white or light-colored swimsuit should be made of two layers of fabric, and the lower one is made of high-density fabric. When choosing a model in white, but with a pattern, make sure that it is in the right places - just in case. Well, swimwear for girls, of course, can be white without any restrictions.
The embroidery on the swimsuit is a very nifty touch, but you need to be vigilant here too. If an embroidery on a non-woven basis is attached to the model you like, then it may very well be that after several washes the part will sit down and "pull" the fabric along with it. It is better if the embroidery is done directly on the swimsuit itself. Beads, sequins and rhinestones look attractive, but here, be guided by quality: in inexpensive models, all this beauty will sprinkle or lose paint in a matter of days. However, if you do not mind the time, you can strengthen the jointing with your own hands. But is it worth it, with a large selection of quality models?
Knitted swimwear is a special chic. On slender tanned bodies, they look sophisticated and provocative. However, before buying such a model, study the composition of the yarn: if the polyacrylic content in it is less than 70%, it is very possible that after a week of rest on the coast, the swimsuit will lose its shape and stretch.
When buying any model, pay attention to such seemingly trifle as elastic bands in the belt and at the base of the bodice. It is better if they are wide (7-10 mm) and well stretched. Did you find out during fitting that the elastic band is a little tight somewhere? Choose a larger size, as when walking in a wet swimsuit, a tight elastic band delivers considerable inconvenience. A convenient model in this regard is a swimsuit with drawstring swimming trunks. However, it happens that they strive to untie themselves. A little trick - tie the ribbons after wetting them, and there will be no unpleasant surprises.
Be observant, getting to know a person, try to learn as much information about him as possible
1. Attention to the photos posted in his profile. If in everyone's photo he is in the company of good friends and hot chicks during the party, and you like just such entertainment - then go for it! If you are absolutely not a club girl, slow down. And do you know why? Due to the fact that 99 percent of this young man needs a woman who will rock with him.
Even if you have found a very attractive man, take a closer look at who exactly surrounds him in the photo. In case you don’t have such pictures, you probably don’t have much in common. In one of the photos he is with his sister, and in the other he is fond of diving or watching a football match? If you are impressed by the sports rhythm of life and family values \u200b\u200bare important to you, perhaps you can do something.
2. Avoid virtual rakes. If a representative of the stronger sex in the first message refers to you "baby", "sweet" or "baby", this is alarming, since first of all it is a sign of poor upbringing. It is very possible that he writes such letters to everyone in a row, hoping that at least someone will fall on the hook. Such young men do not need a serious relationship, be sure. Or, for example, he immediately writes that he is very well off and indicates the level of his own income. There is also something wrong and alarming here, since under no circumstances will you know what plans such people may pursue.
3. Find out as much as possible about him. Remember preparing for exams - you constantly read the textbook. Before meeting a virtual gentleman in reality, try to get as much information as possible about him. Even if he looks like an innocent lamb, in reality he may turn out to be a real psychopath. Try to "break" it in the search engines. It is very likely that he has a blog on some of the online services. There may be more photos and information. Naturally, one should not find out everything, until then, in which school he studied or what he ate for dinner the night before. however, before the date, it is useful to clarify the main points about the guy.
4. You must have the same sense of humor. We all want to find a young man, caring, intelligent and certainly with a great sense of humor. This property is often mentioned in profiles of virtual dating sites. There are, of course, people on earth to whom any humor surrenders to incomprehensible, but most of us still like to laugh. However, the fact that one finds it funny may turn out to be absolutely ridiculous for another. We cannot amuse everyone and everyone, and not many manage to make us laugh, however, if you report something funny, and he likes the given and he laughs, it is very likely that he is the one you need.
Pay special attention
| Parameter name | Value |
| Topic of the article: | Pay special attention |
| Category (thematic category) | Production |
1. The main statement of the historical school is that the economy of each country develops according to its own laws, which depend on its history, traditions, legislation. This theory is based on this paradigm.
2. Pay attention to the non-class approach in identifying the stages of development of the national economy (F. List). The same approach is used by institutionalists and neoinstitutionalists.
3. F. List considered an active state policy a necessary condition for economic progress, in contrast to the "laissez faire" of the classics.
4. B. Hildebrand believed that the credit economy is the highest type of economy. The exchange is carried out without the participation of money, on the basis of a loan. All opportunities are open for active people: even with the help of a loan, you can become an entrepreneur. Compare with the present.
5. Please note that some of the ideas of the historical school have something in common with the ideas of the modern school of evolutionary economics.
6. Many elements from the "historical school" have been adopted by institutionalism, therefore, these schools are studied together. You can independently highlight the differences between them.
7. The use of the concept "institution" instead of the economic category meant the desire of scientists to expand the subject of economic science, to include in the analysis of non-economic phenomena and institutions.
8. If the neoclassicists proceed from the thesis about the perfection of the market economic mechanism and self-regulation of the economy, adhere to "pure economic science", then institutionalists consider spiritual, moral, legal and others considered in a historical context as the driving force of the economy along with material factors. Representatives of this trend deny the decisive role of economic relations between people in the system of social relations.
10. Pay attention to the driving motives of human behavior, which are identified by T. Veblen.
11. T. Veblen analyzes the behavior and thinking not of an individual person, but of social groups of the population conditioned by social motives.
12. W. Mitchell believed that government regulation is the best means of resolving the contradictions of capitalism, a means of countercyclical politics.
13. The main feature of W. Mitchell's ideas is the theory of a self-generating business cycle, ᴛ.ᴇ. the business cycle reproduces itself.
test questions
1. What are the peculiar conditions of the socio-economic development of Germany explain the emergence of the historical school?
2. The main economic ideas of F. Liszt.
3. What five stages in the evolution of the national economy does F. List highlight?
4. What is the goal pursued by "educational" protectionism according to the economic ideas of F. List?
5. Why did B. Hildebrand consider the credit economy to be the highest type of economy?
6. For ignoring what factors that have a huge impact on the motives of human activity, B. Hildebrand criticizes A. Smith and his followers?
7. WhyK. Knies rejected the very possibility of the existence of economic theory?
8. What basic ideas of G. Schmoller coincided with the ideas of K. Marx?
9. Basic ideas of L. Brentano.
10. How did L. Brentano substantiate the interest of entrepreneurs in the growth of wages?
11. What are the three main forms of competition V. Sombart singles out in the modern world?
12. What are the main reasons for smoothing out fluctuations in the market situation considered by W. Sombart?
13. What is the essence of M. Weber's concept of capitalist society as a concentrated expression of economic rationality?
14. How is “institution” understood in institutionalism?
15. Which three major economists are at the origin of institutionalism?
16. What are the stages in the evolution of institutionalism.
17. What are the main problems investigated by institutionalism?
18. What three currents of American institutionalism do you know?
19. What are the main problems investigated by socio-psychological institutionalism (T. Veblen)?
20. How does T. Veblen distinguish industry and business?
21. What, according to JR Commons, causes social conflict?
22. Contribution of W. Mitchell to economic science.
23. What role did W. Mitchell assign to government regulation?
24. What role did W. Mitchell assign to money?
25. How do you understand Mitchell's theory of the self-generated business cycle?
Pay special attention - concept and types. Classification and features of the category "Pay special attention" 2017, 2018.
1. Unlike other economists who focused their attention on the activities of individual economic units, J. Keynes significantly expanded the scope of the study, considering the national economy as a whole. 2. Keynes expresses the idea that capitalism of the period ....
1. Historical and theoretical roots of Marxism. 2. Marxism as a systemic doctrine has three components (according to V. I. Lenin): philosophy (materialism), political economy, socialism. Economic doctrine occupies a paramount place in the entire system of Marxist ...
1. Neoliberalism is a trend in economic science and practice of managing economic activity, whose supporters defend the principle of self-regulation of the economy, free from excessive regulation. 2. L. von Mises believed that only a free market ....
1. Features of Eastern and ancient slavery and their reflection in the teachings of thinkers and documents of that time. 2. The role of the state in the organization and management of the economy in various ancient sources. 3. Attitude towards private property in the conditions of the oriental and ancient ...
