FORMATION AND SOCIAL STRUCTURE CITY COUNCILS IN THE 1870–1880s AND THEIR SOCIAL STRUCTURE (BASED ON THE MATERIALS OF THE VLADIMIR, NIZHNY NOVGOROD AND TULA PROVINCES)

The article examines the procedure for the formation of city dumas in the towns of Nizhny Novgorod, Vladimir and Tula governorates in the 1870–1880s on the basis of archival materials. The author studies the electorate, their distribution by categories in accordance with the Municipal statutes of 1870, as well as the estate composition of councilors in city dumas. As a result of the reform of 1870, not all urban residents received the right to vote. The property qualification gave the opportunity to participate in the elections only to the most affluent part of the population. Distribution of voters into three categories, depending on the amount of taxes paid, was one of the characteristic features and one of the main problems of the electoral system that operated in towns of the second half of the 19th century. In practice, as a result of restrictions established by the law, a significant part of urban residents were deprived of the right to vote. As follows from the collected archival data, the persons who voted in the first and second categories showed the greatest activity as voters. At this, the turnout among the electors in the third category was extremely low. The central government, determining the procedure for the formation of self-governance bodies, was interested in ensuring a privileged position of the noble estate. Nevertheless, the analysis of city dumas composition based on the materials of the selected provinces shows that a significant part of councilors was made by representatives of the merchant class and petty bourgeoisie. The appearance of peasant class representatives in the city dumas is noteworthy. Thus, despite equality of estates in the municipal self-governance bodies created as a result of the reform of 1870, not all urban residents could vote. But even those who were granted the right to vote often did not use it. As a rule, the least activity was characteristic for the third category voters, which included the less affluent segments of the urban population and who did not see the point in participating in public life. Among the more affluent citizens who voted in the first and second categories, electoral activity was quite high. Merchants and rich representatives of the petty-bourgeoisie estate showed the greatest interest in the sphere of self-governance.