STUDIES OF ST. PETERSBURG.—MUJIKS.—"THE IMPERIAL NOSEGAY."—A SHORT HISTORY OF RUSSIAN SERFDOM.—ITS ORIGIN, GROWTH, AND ABUSES.—EMANCIPATION OF THE SERFS.—PRESENT CONDITION OF THE PEASANT CLASS.—SEEING THE EMPEROR.—HOW THE CZAR APPEARS IN PUBLIC.—PUBLIC AND SECRET POLICE.—THEIR EXTRAORDINARY POWERS.—ANECDOTES OF POLICE SEVERITY.—RUSSIAN COURTS OF LAW.  
For the remainder of their stay in the capital Doctor Bronson and the youths were more leisurely in their movements than during the first few days. They dismissed the guide, as they felt that they could go around without his aid, though they occasionally re-engaged him for special trips when they thought their inexperience would be a bar to their progress.
In thus acting they followed out a plan adopted long before. On arriving in a strange city where time was limited, they engaged a guide, in order that they might "do" the stock sights of the place as quickly as possible. If they were to remain for some time they employed him during the first two or three days, and afterwards shifted for themselves. This is an excellent system, and is recommended to all readers of this volume who may have occasion to travel in foreign lands.
Having familiarized themselves with St. Petersburg, our friends usually spent the forenoon of each day at the hotel, and the afternoon and part of the evening in going about the streets, making calls, and otherwise improving their opportunities. The forenoon was by no means an idle time. Doctor Bronson was busy with his letters and other matters, while the youths were engaged in writing up their journals, preparing the histories which have been mentioned elsewhere, and making various notes and observations concerning what they saw or learned. In this way they accumulated much valuable material, and we are specially fortunate in being permitted to copy at will from what they wrote.
"We have found a great deal to interest us," said Frank in his journal, when he sat down to make a general commentary on what they had seen, "and I hardly know where to begin. Of course we have been much[Pg 173] impressed with the great number and variety of the uniforms of the officers and soldiers of the army; and though we have tried hard to recognize the different arms of the service at sight, we have not always succeeded. We wonder how the Emperor himself can know them all, but of course he must.
 AN IMPERIAL NOSEGAY.
"We have looked for 'The Imperial Nosegay' which one traveller describes, but have failed thus far to find it. The story goes that one of the Emperors had a regiment composed of men whose noses were turned up at an angle of forty-five degrees; whenever a man was found anywhere in the Empire with that particular kind of nose he was at once drafted into the regiment. A good many of the peasants have the nose inclined[Pg 174] very much in the air, but facial ornaments of the kind described for the famous regiment are not strictly the fashion.
"Fred thinks a regiment composed in this way ought to be good soldiers, as they would be able to smell the smoke of battle a long way off, and before other regiments would be aware of it. Certainly they ought to breathe easily, and this ability was considered of great importance by the first Napoleon. 'Other things being equal,' he used to say, 'always choose an officer with a large nose. His respiration is more free than that of the small-nosed man; and with good breathing powers, his mind is clearer and his physical endurance greater.' Perhaps he realized on his retreat from Moscow that many of his pursuers were of the kind he describes.
 MUJIKS PLAYING CARDS.
"We have been much interested in the mujiks, or peasants—the lowest class of the population, and also the largest. Their condition has improved greatly in the last twenty or thirty years, if what we read and[Pg 175] hear is correct. We had read of the system of serfdom in Russia before we came here, but did not exactly understand it. Since our arrival in St. Petersburg we have tried to find out about the serfs, and here is what we have learned:
"To begin at the end, rather than at the beginning, there are no longer any serfs in Russia, and consequently we are talking about something that belongs to the past. Serfdom, or slavery, formerly existed throughout all Europe—in England, France, Germany, Spain, and other countries. It has been gradually extinguished, Russia being the last Christian country to maintain it. Slavery still exists in certain forms in Turkey; but as the Turks are Moslems, and not Christians, I don't see why we should expect anything better in that country.
"Serfdom began later in Russia than in any other European country, and perhaps that fact excuses the Russians for being the last to give it up. Down to the eleventh century the peasant could move about pretty much as he liked. The land was the property of all, and he could cultivate any part of it as long as he did not trespass upon any one else. In many of the villages the land is still held on this communistic principle, and is allotted every year, or every two or three years, by the elders. In some communities the land must be surrendered to the commune every nine years, while in others the peasant has a life tenancy, or what is called in law a fee-simple.
"I hear some one ask how it came about that serfdom was established.
"According to our authorities, it came from the state of the country, which was just a little better than a collection of independent principalities. The princes were cruel and despotic, and the people turbulent; murders of princes were very common; the princes could only protect themselves by organizing large body-guards, which gave each prince a small army of men around him. In course of time the officers of these body-guards became noblemen, and received grants of land. At first the peasants could move about on these estates with perfect freedom, but during the sixteenth century they were attached to the soil. In other words, they were to remain where they were when the decree was issued, and whenever the land was sold they were sold with it.
"It is said that the object of this decree was not so much in the interest of the land-owners as in that of the Government, which was unable to collect its taxes from men who were constantly moving about. Where the land belonged to the Government and not to individuals, the peasants living upon it became serfs of the Crown, or Crown peasants. Thus the[Pg 176] Russian serf might belong to a prince, nobleman, or other person, or he might belong to the Government. Private estates were often mortgaged to the Government; if the mortgage was unpaid and the property forfeited, the serfs became Crown peasants instead of private ones.
 PEASANT'S HOUSE IN SOUTHERN RUSSIA.
"There was a curious condition about serfdom in Russia, that while the man and his family belonged to the master, the land which he cultivated was his own, or at any rate could not be taken from him. The serf owed a certain amount of labor to his master (ordinarily three days out of every seven), and could not leave the place without permission. A serf might hire his time from his master, in the same way that slaves used to hire their time in America; but he was required to return to the estate whenever the master told him to do so. Many of the mechanics, isvoshchiks, and others in the large cities before the emancipation were serfs, who came to find employment, and regularly sent a part of their wages to their masters.
"Sometimes the masters were very severe upon the serfs, and treated them outrageously. A master could send a serf into exile in Siberia without giving any reason. The record said he was banished 'by the will of his master,' and that was all. A woman, a serf on an estate, who had a[Pg 177] fine voice, came to Moscow, and found a place in the chorus at the opera-house. She gradually rose to a high position, and was earning a large salary, half of which she sent to her master. Out of caprice he ordered her back to the estate, where she resumed the drudgery of a peasant life. He refused all offers of compensation, and said his serf should do what he wished.
"Another serf had established a successful business in Moscow, where he was employing two or three hundred workmen. The master allowed him to remain there for years, taking for his compensation a large part of the serf's earnings, and finally, in a fit of anger, ordered the man home again. The man offered to pay a hundred times as much as he could earn on the estate, but the master would not listen to it, and the business was broken up and ruined.
"Things went on in this way for two or three centuries. Various changes were made in the laws, and the condition of the serfs, especially of those belonging to the Crown, was improved from time to time. At last, in 1861, came the decree of emancipation from the hands of Alexander II., and the system of serfdom came to an end.
"It was not, as many people suppose, a system of sudden and universal freedom. The emancipation was gradual, as it covered a period of several years, and required a great deal of negotiation. The land-owners were compensated by the Government for their loss; the serfs received grants of land, varying from five to twenty-five acres, with a house and a small orchard, and the result was that every agricultural serf became a small land-owner. Private or Government serfs were treated alike in this respect, and the condition of the peasant class was greatly improved.
"Since they have been free to go where they like, the serfs have crowded to the cities in search of employment, and the owners of factories and shops say they can now obtain laborers much easier than before. Manufacturing interests have been materially advanced along with agriculture, and though many persons feared the results of the emancipation, it is now difficult to find one who would like to have the old state of things restored.
"Russian emancipation of the serfs and American abolition of slavery came within a short time of each other. Both the nations have been greatly benefited by the result, and to-day an advocate of serfdom is as rare in Russia as an advocate of slavery in the United States."
Frank read to his cousin the little essay we have just quoted; then he read it to the Doctor, and asked whether it would be well to insert it in his journal.
"By all means do so," the Doctor replied. "There are not many people[Pg 178] in America who understand exactly what serfdom was, and your essay will do much to enlighten them."
Accordingly Frank carefully copied what he had written. Impressed with Doctor Bronson's suggestion, we have reproduced it here, in the confidence that our youthful readers will find it interesting and instructive.
 PEASANTS' HUTS.
"You can add to your account of serfdom," said Doctor Bronson, "that when it was established by Boris Godounoff, in 1601, it was regarded by both peasant and noble as a great popular reform, and welcomed with delight. His decree went into force on Saint George's Day, in the year named, and its principal provision was that every peasant in the Empire should in future till and own forever the land which he then tilled and held. It was an act of great liberality on the part of the Czar, for by it he gave up millions of acres belonging to the Crown and made them the property of the peasants.
"The serf of the Crown was to till the land, build his house, pay his taxes, and serve as a soldier whenever wanted; the private serf existed under very nearly the same conditions, with the difference that his life[Pg 179] might be more oppressed under a cruel master, and more free under a kind one, than that of the serf of the Crown. This was what happened in many instances; and as the masters were more likely to be cruel than kind, and their tendency was to make as much as possible out of their possessions, the Crown serf was generally better off than the private one.
 ESTHONIAN PEASANTS.
"In the beginning the system was really the reform which was intended, but very soon it was subject to many abuses. Year by year things[Pg 180] grew worse: owners violated the law by selling serfs away from their estates; the masters exacted from their serfs every copeck they could earn, flogged them if they lagged in their labor, and often caused them to be severely punished or exiled on the merest caprice. Peter the Great introduced some changes with the best intentions, but they only made matters worse. He stopped the sale of serfs from the estates, which was an excellent step; at the same time he ordered that all taxes should be collected in a lump from the master, who should have the power in turn to collect from the serfs. The evil of this enactment was very soon apparent; Peter's successors struggled with the problem, but none made much headway until Alexander II. came with his act of emancipation, which you have just mentioned.
"There were several conditions attached to the freedom of the serf under Alexander's decree," the Doctor continued, "which are not generally understood. To prevent the peasant resuming again the nomadic life which serfdom was intended to suppress, it was ordered that no peasant could leave his village without surrendering forever all right to the lands, and he was also required to be clear of all claims for rent, taxes, conscription, private debts, and the like. He was to provide for the support of any members of his family dependent upon him whom he left behind, and also present a certificate of membership in another commune, or exhibit the title-deeds to a plot of land of not less than a given area.
"These requirements were found an excellent restriction, as under them only the thrifty and enterprising serfs were able to clear off all demands upon them and pay the amount required for entering another community. Men of this class found their way to the cities and larger towns, where many of them have risen in wealth and influence, while the quiet, plodding peasants who remained on the estates and tilled their lands have generally prospered. A gentleman who has studied this question wrote recently as follows:
"'Opposite and extreme opinions prevail as to the results of emancipation; yet, on massing and balancing his observations on the whole, a stranger must perceive that under emancipation the peasant is better dressed, better lodged, and better fed; that his wife is healthier, his children cleaner, and his homestead tidier; that he and his belongings are improved by the gift which changed him from a chattel to a man. He builds his cabin of better wood, and in the eastern provinces, if not in all, you find improvements in the walls and roof. He paints the logs, and fills up the cracks with plaster, where he formerly left them bare and stuffed with moss. He sends his boys to school, and goes himself more frequently[Pg 181] to church.... The burgher class and the merchant class have been equally benefited by the change. A good many peasants have become burghers, and a good many burghers merchants. All the domestic and useful trades have been quickened into life. More shoes are worn, more carts are wanted, more cabins are built. Hats, coats, and cloaks are in higher demand; the bakeries and breweries find more to do; the teacher gets more pupils, and the banker has more customers on his books.'"[3]
 ALEXANDER II., THE LIBERATOR OF THE SERFS.
With a few more words upon serfdom and its relation to other forms of slavery, the subject was dropped, and our friends went out for a walk. As they passed along the Nevski they were suddenly involved in a crowd, and half forced into the door of a shop which they had visited the day before. They were recognized by the proprietor, who invited them to enter and make themselves comfortable. "The Emperor is coming in a few minutes," he explained, "and the police are clearing the way for him."
[Pg 182]
One of the youths asked if it was always necessary to clear the streets in this way when the Emperor rod............