the sudden dismissal of the minister of public instruction, the former university professor s?nger, led me to discuss it more exhaustively with several high dignitaries who willingly gave me information during my sojourn in st. petersburg. i had the opportunity of conversing with persons exceptionally well-informed, but, for reasons easily conceivable, i am not permitted to mention their names. i report here, from my notes, an interview with a person standing near to the retired minister, and still in active government service, because it seems interesting to me even now.

"in the first place," said my informant, "you must not believe that s?nger was dismissed. he himself insisted that his resignation, repeatedly offered, be finally accepted. scarcely two days ago the czar asked a general, highly esteemed by him, who came here from warsaw, where s?nger had formerly acted as curator of the university, as to his opinion of s?nger, and the general answered that he considered s?nger a very honest and learned man. 'i have just that opinion of him myself,'[pg 95] said the czar, complainingly, 'but he positively would not remain.'"

"why does your excellency believe that s?nger had become so tired of his position?"

"there are permanent and special reasons. the permanent ones are harder to explain than the special ones. i therefore begin with the more difficult. a minister of public instruction—'lucus a non lucendo'—has here a very difficult post when he is an honest man and really desires to live up to his duties. for what he is really asked to do is, that he do not enlighten the people, that he do nothing for education, that he merely pretend activity. we need no education; we need obedience. that, of course, is not said to the czar, who really believes that he is being served honestly. but in the end it amounts to this, that only one man rules here, the minister of the interior and chief of the secret police, and that all the other ministers must dance to his music. i make exception here, to a certain extent, of the ministers of war and of finance. but if in any case there be a possibility of conflict between any other department and the omnipotent police ministry, that other department must subordinate itself to the rule of the latter. for von plehve stands guard over the security of the empire. you understand that all other considerations are silenced here. the third division (the secret police) and the holy synod are the pillars of our empire. of what importance is here an [pg 96]inoffensive minister of instruction, or culture, as he is called in your country?"

"i should be obliged to your excellency for concrete examples."

"here they are. there was, for instance, general wannowski, a really competent and influential man. while he was at the head of the department of instruction he could not be so easily turned down at the court as our ordinary university professor. wannowski even effected some reforms in our universities, but finally he, too, found it desirable to retire from the field. do you think it possible for a minister to remain in office when a regulation prepared by him, approved by the czar, and made public, must next day be withdrawn because the minister of the interior states in a special report that this regulation is in opposition to the general government policy and is a danger to the security of the country?"

"and has that occurred?"

"something of that kind was a secondary cause also of s?nger's resignation. as former curator of the university of warsaw, he knew poland well. with the czar's approval, he framed a regulation for instruction in poland that was pedagogically wise and politically conciliating. instantly plehve made objection—for a relief of the tension everywhere prevailing does not suit his system—and secured the withdrawal of the regulation."

"but could not s?nger defend his measures?"

[pg 97]

"his position was already weakened. above all, his enemies succeeded in placing him under suspicion as guilty of philo-semitism. you know, or perhaps do not know, that it is also a part of the system here to keep the jews—particularly the jews—from higher education; and this higher education in itself runs contrary to the desire of the dictator-general of the holy synod and to that of the police. a minister of public instruction, particularly when he hails from the learned professions, may easily commit the error of making science readily accessible to all properly qualified. s?nger granted some alleviation to the jews, so that the most gifted among them, especially when their academy professor had already taken a warm interest in them, could enter the university without great difficulty. he was reproached with that, and that would have been sufficient to weaken the position of a stronger man."

"i am not familiar with the disabilities of jewish students."

"a detailed description of these disabilities would carry you too far afield. suffice it to state that we possess a very complicated system, particularly developed in moscow, for the exclusion of jewish children from the schools. the ratio of three to one hundred must, however, be conveniently tolerated. now it happens quite frequently that, no matter how strict the director at admission, on promotion from the lower to the higher class this[pg 98] relation is shifted in favor of the jews, because of their diligence and sobriety in contrast to the characteristics of the sons of the russian officials. then the trouble begins anew. splendidly qualified candidates cannot enter the university, since the prescribed percentage has already been reached. the professors, however, who are not pronounced anti-semites really like these jewish students who have survived this process of selection, for they are really studious. but that again is opposed to the principles of the accepted policy. and whoever is inclined to take sides with the professors rather than with the bulwarks of this general policy may easily find himself in the toils, as it happened, for instance, in s?nger's case."

"who are these bulwarks of this general policy?" an involuntary glance towards the door, as if to see whether some uninvited listener was not accidentally near—a glance i have frequently seen only in russia—was the first answer. then, even in lower tones than before, he proceeded.

"that is still a portion of the legacy of alexander iii., rigidly guarded by the dowager-empress, and particularly by the grand-duke sergius in moscow. when in the russo-turkish war enormous peculations of the military stores were discovered, the heir to the throne, then commander of a corps in the reserve, was persuaded that the jewish contractors had defrauded the army, and the officer of the secret police, zhikharev, exerted himself to prove[pg 99] that two-thirds of all the revolutionaries were jews. that belief remained, just as a great portion of the french still cling to the belief that dreyfus is a traitor because he is used as a scapegoat for the information-mongers of high rank on the general staff. something similar happened here. i really have no desire to defend any jewish contractor; but when there was in our stores lime-dust instead of flour in the sacks, quite other people than the jews pocketed the difference. however, that is another story. grand-duke sergius, of moscow, has among his other passions bigotry and a fanatical hatred of jews. and he is the uncle and brother-in-law of the czar."

"then s?nger found himself in a rather dubious position mainly as a philo-semite?"

"at least as a man of not sufficiently pronounced anti-semitism. but also because he was not really the man to hold his own with the generals and talents of the career-maker von plehve. finally, he was blamed for adverse criticism of the general principles of the government expressed at various conventions."

"at what conventions?"

"there was lately a convention of public-school teachers that presumed to criticise by speaking the truth about an intimate of plehve's, pronin, of kishinef. i must emphasize here, by-the-way, that there was only an insignificant minority of jews at that convention. then there was a medical congress[pg 100] whose hygienic resolutions hid under a very thin hygienic disguise an arraignment of the system of stupefying the populace. the lord knows s?nger had surely no premonition of these occurrences. but they concerned his department; the spirit of his staff was not right, and he alone was to blame for it, especially since von plehve knew very well what s?nger thought of him."

"always plehve, and only plehve!"

"he is our little metternich. a representative man, to quote emerson. the régime cannot be discussed without the mention of his name. here is another little sample of plehve. there is a professor kuzmin-karavayev at the academy of military and international law. he was elected member of the st. petersburg city council, and is a member of the zemstvo of tver, a highly respected, upright man, interested in popular education. but now he has been forbidden any public activity by the following letter of von plehve. plehve wrote to kuropatkin, the minister of war: 'by virtue of the authority vested in me by the emperor on january 8, 1904, i would simply dismiss professor kuzmin-karavayev as politically inconvenient. but since he is in the government service i ask you to insist that the aforesaid professor renounce all public activity.' this is literally true. you see how the omnipotent plehve treats even a favorite like kuropatkin, to say nothing of a timid, good professor like our s?nger! you may rest assured that,[pg 101] with all his upright views, we lost little in his resignation; he was without influence and too weak."

"and who will succeed him?"

"that is quite immaterial. major-general shilder, superintendent of the cadet corps, has already been offered the position, but he declined it. as long as plehve's spirit and that of his minions is sweeping over the waters nothing will happen save what favors the suppression of public enlightenment and the prevention of revolution. the name is but an empty sound."

"your excellency, should i commit an indiscretion by publishing our conversation just as it took place?"

"with the necessary precaution of leaving out my name, for i naturally have no inclination to attract the especial anger of our dictator-general. for the rest, i do not believe i have told you anything that could not be said in almost the same words by any one at all familiar with conditions as they are."

"that, your excellency, i must confirm. one of the greatest riddles for me is the formation of a public opinion in st. petersburg, where the papers dare not even hint of what is spoken in the circles of the intelligent classes."

"russia also has its constitution," said he, rising, and smiling significantly. "that constitution consists of the dissensions among the ministers. and when among ourselves, a certain discretion assumed,[pg 102] we do not stand on ceremony. here you have the sources of public opinion"—again the significant smile—"you will perhaps understand why no minister fares well."

"hence also plehve?"

(a motion of despairing defence.) "he? no! speaking seriously. it is the curse of our country. may the lord save us!"