The second Duma was convened in February 1907. As chairman, it elected the noted land movement figure and Deputy for Moscow Province, attorney Fëdor Golovin (1867–1937), one of the founders of the Constitutional Democratic Party. In all, this Duma operated for 102 days during only one session. Most of its meetings were devoted to problems of procedure. This became a unique way of fighting the government during the discussion of various bills, which the government believed the Duma had no right to raise or discuss. The government, answerable only to the tsar, did not wish to consider the deputies’ opinions, and the deputies, regarding themselves as the people’s elected representatives, did not wish to submit to this state of affairs, striving to achieve their goals by one means or another. Ultimately, this confrontation became one of the main causes of the second Duma’s dissolution on June 3, 1907.
As a result of the introduction of a new election law in Russia, a third State Duma was formed, the only one of the four that survived its full five-year term under law, from November 1907 to June 1912. It held five sessions. As chairman, the Duma elected Nikolay Khomyakov (1850–1925), a leader of the October 17 Alliance. In March 1910, he was replaced by Aleksandr Guchkov (1862–1936), a noted politician and leader of the October 17 Party, and a year later, the Duma elected Mikhail Rodzyanko (1859–1924), a major political figure and one of the leaders of the October 17 Party.
The fourth Duma, the last in the history of autocratic Russia, arose during a period of increasing crisis for the country and the whole world: the eve of the First World War. Five sessions were held between November 1912 and October 1917. The fourth Duma differed little in makeup from the third, except that a considerable number of clergy were added to the ranks of deputies. The chairman of the fourth Duma for its entire term was Mikhail Rodzyanko. It should be noted that the Fourth State Duma played a leading role in instituting the Provisional Govern-ment after the collapse of the autocracy. Beginning in March 1917, it operated through private meetings, but on October 6, 1917, the Provisional Government of the Russian Republic ordered the Duma dissolved in connection with preparations for elections to the Constitutional Convention.
In all four State Dumas, the ranks of the deputies were dominated (in various proportions, of course) by members of the landed gentry, trading and industrial bourgeoisie, urban intelligentsia, and peasantry. They brought to the institution their ideas of ways for Russia to develop and their skills in public debate. It was especially illustrative that the intelligentsia used skills acquired in university lecture halls and courtrooms, while the peasants brought many democratic traditions of community self-government. In their work, the deputies made wide use of a system of inquiries. In response to any emergency, after collecting a certain number of signatures, the deputies could submit an interpellation, that is, a demand that the government account for its actions, to which one or another minister had to respond. Thus, the birth of Russian parliamentarianism provided valuable experience combating authoritarian propensities in the activities of rulers. The practice of discussing various bills in the Duma is still of unequivocal interest for modern parliamentarians. For example, the third Duma had some 30 deputy committees. The more important committees, such as the budget committee, had several dozen members. The Duma’s own legislative initiative was limited by the requirement that each proposal have at least 30 sponsors. Based on one such initiative, the Duma developed and adopted one of the most progressive factory and plant laws in Europe.
In the opinion of a number of Russian historians, on the whole, the work of the State Duma was an important factor in the political development of early 20th-century Russia, substantially affecting many sectors of public life, including the development of the oil industry. This is where the first attempt was made to begin truly meaningful, systematic efforts to introduce civil law principles into the use of mineral resources, and to correct contradictions in the framework of the rigid administrative regime governing the exploitation of oil fields and the need to ensure freedom for private enterprise.
As an example, we can cite the inquiry of October 19, 1909 submitted by a group of 42 members of the October 17 Alliance bloc in the State Duma, “On the Illegal Cession of Oil-Bearing Parcels in Baku Province,” which spoke of a flagrant violation of law on the part of the Russian Ministry of Trade and Industry in allocating oil-bearing lands on the Absheron Peninsula to two highly placed tsarist dignitaries, hunt director [Jägermeister] Vasily I. Mamantov and hunt director Pavel P. Golenishchev-Kutuzov-Tolstoy. Discussion of this inquiry in the State Duma erupted in a loud scandal, and exposed a shocking forgery with the assignment of oil-bearing lands to “dead souls”56—the Caucasian Partnership, which had ceased to exist in 1900, and two long-dead entrepreneurs, Bastamov and Shkhiyants. This parliamentary session was widely covered in the Russian and foreign press, and evoked a strong public response, which ultimately caused the minister of industry and trade, privy councilor Vladimir Timiryazev, to resign in disgrace.
In early 1913, Russia saw a substantial rise in petroleum products prices, and began to experience a shortage of kerosene, lubricants, and residual oil, which created serious problems for the normal operation of the national economy. In March 1913, the State Duma sent the government an inquiry, “On the Activities of Syndicates in the Oil Industry,” where it raised the following question fairly clearly: “Is the Minister of Trade and Industry aware that the activities of major oil companies are giving obvious and clear indications of the existence of an illegal oil-industry syndicate? If so, what steps has he taken to investigate these illegal activities and to curtail further existence of the syndicate?” The discussion of this parliamentary inquiry within the government led to the development and implementation of a series of concrete steps to develop the national oil industry and correct the situation in the country’s oil market, and led to a certain mitigation of the petroleum fuel shortage. But the First World War, which began in August 1914, prevented the full implementation of these plans.
We should note that the history of parliamentary activity in tsarist Russia is extraordinarily relevant and necessary today. It teaches the public representatives of our time to be combative, to be able to defend the public interest under strong pressure from the executive branch, to engage in sharp parliamentary debate, to find creative ways for the body of deputies to work together, to maintain a high degree of professionalism, and to be proactive lawmakers.
Regaining Lost Ground
After the events of August 1905, the Russian government and oil industrialists undertook emergency measures to restore the damaged oil fields on the Absheron Peninsula and exerted great efforts to rehabilitate oilfield and processing equipment, but the level of damage done prevented a quick recovery of what had been lost. Russia produced 53.8 million barrels (8.09 million tons) in 1906, 62.3 million barrels (9.36 million tons) in 1907, and 63.4 million barrels (9.53 million tons) in 1908.
During 1906 alone, three conferences were held, in February, June, and December, by the main representative organization of the industry’s entrepreneurs, the Baku Congress of Oil Industrialists. The resolutions of the Congress contained specific proposals to the government for leading the Russian oil industry out of its severe crisis and restoring Russia’s position as a stable, competitive supplier to the European and world petroleum product markets.
It seemed that joint government and industry efforts would soon show positive results. The government adopted a decision to grant loans worth 20 million rubles to the oil industrialists, although in fact only 13 million rubles in loans was actually disbursed. In 1906, the government held regular auctions for new oil-bearing areas on the Absheron Peninsula. Under the provisional rules in place at the time, auctions favored higher percentage payments to the treasury of produced oil; that is, whoever offered a greater share would win the desired oil-bearing parcel. At auction, the major companies that won the bids offered the treasury 57–70% of the oil produced as rent.