Borisov Andrey Viktorovich. Candidate of historical sciences, associate professor, sub-department of foreign languages and foreign language teaching technique, Penza State University (40 Krasnaya street, Penza, Russia), email@example.com
Background. In contemporary Russia, local self-governments form an essential part of government, and the concept itself gets new understanding. Nowadays it is of great importance to research the history of local self-governing of the post-reform period, when social institutes just began joining the government system. The aim of the research is to analyze the work of municipal social institutes of Middle Volga region in terms of public order maintenance and security, and their interaction with local self-governments and urban forces.
Materials and methods. To achieve the research aim we used the documents from the Penza Region State Archive, Ulyanovsk Region State Archive, as well as local self-governments’ session journals, containing written data of important mu-nicipal issues. The research is based on the principles of historicism and objective-ness, as well as the scientific analysis of factual data and the comparative method.
Results. The competence of local self-governments and urban forces was re-searched. The indefinite status of the police regarding local slef-governemnts was ascertained. The interaction of the municipal dumas and the police in terms of public order maintenance was analyzed.
Conclusions. Cooperative actions of local administrations and local slef-governments in terms of solving essential municipal problems led to positive results. In terms of public order maintenance and security, local self-governments actively cooperated with the head of police; together they issued compulsory regulations for citizens. Very often governors asked municipal dumas to increase the number of policemen, which was a result of the city growth and an increase of the number of citizens. In general, their collaboration in terms of security can be characterized by mutual understanding and absence of conflict situations.
1. Lapteva L. E. Regional'noe i mestnoe upravlenie v Rossii. Vtoraya polovina XIX veka [Regional and local self-governments in Russia. Second part of XIX century]. Moscow: Izd-vo RAN, 1998, p. 79.
2. Nardova V. A. Gorodskoe samoupravlenie v Rossii v 60-e – nachale 90-kh gg. XIX veka [Municipal self-government in Russia in 1860s – early 1890s]. Leningrad: Nauka, 1984, p. 250.
3. Medvedeva G. A. Samoupravlenie russkogo provintsial'nogo goroda (konets XVIII – nachalo XX veka): dis. kand. ist. nauk [Self-government in a Russian provincial town (late XVIII – early XX centuries)]. Voronezh, 2003, p. 186.
4. Gosudarstvennyy arkhiv Penzenskoy oblasti (GAPO) [State Archive of Penza Region (GAPO)]. F. 361. Op. 1. D. 2. L. 20–21ob.
5. GAPO. F. 361. Op. 1. D. 2. L. 29ob.
6. Shumilov M. M. Mestnoe upravlenie i tsentral'naya vlast' v Rossii v 50-kh – nachale 80-kh gg. XIX veka [Local self-governments and central power in Russia in 1850s – early 1880s]. Moscow: Prometey, 1991, pp. 75–76.
7. Shepelev L. E. Tsarizm i burzhuaziya vo vtoroy polovine XIX veka [Tsarism and bour-geoisie on the second part of XIX century]. Leningrad: Nauka, 1987, p. 110.
8. Eremyan V. V. Munitsipal'naya istoriya Rossii [Municipal history of Russia]. Moscow: Akademicheskiy proekt, 2013, p. 304.
9. Gosudarstvennyy arkhiv Ul'yanovskoy oblasti [State Archive of Ulyanovsk Region]. F. 76. Op. 4. D. 241. L. 151–153.
10. GAPO. F. 109. Op. 1. D. 310. L. 43.
11. Zhurnaly zasedaniy Samarskoy gorodskoy dumy za 1874 god [Journals of Samara mu-nicipal duma’s meetings in 1874]. No. 20, p. 5.
12. Vasil'chikov A. I. O samoupravlenii: v 3 t. [On self-government: in 3 volumes]. Saint-Petersburg: Tipografiya M. M. Stasyulevicha, 1861, vol. 1, p. 49.
13. GAPO. F. 108. Op. 1. D. 668. L. 183ob.
14. GAPO. F. 108. Op. 1. D. 651. L. 247.
15. GAPO. F. 108. Op. 1. D. 655. L. 204–205ob.
16. GAPO. F. 108. Op. 1. D. 655. L. 354–354ob.
17. Tyurin V. A. Gubernskaya administratsiya i gorodskoe obshchestvennoe upravle-nie v provintsial'noy Rossii kontsa XIX – nachala XX veka (Penzenskaya, Samarskaya, Simbirskaya gubernii): dis. kand. ist. nauk [Provincial administration and municipal public administration in provincial Russia in late XIX – early XX centuries (Penza, Sa-mara, Simbirsk provinces): dissertation to apply for the degree of the candidate of his-torical sciences]. Samara, 2004, p. 134.
18. Zhurnaly zasedaniy Samarskoy gorodskoy dumy za 1874 god [Journals of Samara mu-nicipal duma’s meetings in 1874]. No. 20, p. 4.
19. GAPO. F. 108. Op. 1. D. 672. L. 239.
20. GAPO. F. 108. Op. 1. D. 673. L. 413–414ob.
21. GAPO. F. 108. Op. 1. D. 676. L. 505–505ob.
22. GAPO. F. 108. Op. 1. D. 686. L. 9ob.
23. GAPO. F. 109. Op. 1. D. 571. L. 3.
24. Vereshchagin A. A. Vestnik RAN [Bulletin of RAS]. Moscow, 1996, vol. 66, p. 97.
25. Gorodskoe delo [Municipal administration]. 1904, no. 17, p. 79.
26. Nemirovskiy A. O. Reforma gorodskogo samoupravleniya v Rossii [The reform of mu-nicipal self-government in Russia]. Saint-Petersburg: Tipografiya V. Bezobrazova, 1991, p. 56.
27. GAPO. F. 11. Op. 1. D. 764. L. 22–22ob.
28. GAPO. F. 108. Op. 1. D. 691. L. 27ob.
29. GAPO. F. 109. Op. 1. D. 729. L. 18.
30. Golubev A. A. Gubernskaya administratsiya Srednego Povolzh'ya v poreformennyy period: dis. kand. ist. nauk [Provincial administration in Middle Volga region in the post-reform period: dissertation to apply for the degree of the candidate of historical sciences]. Samara, 2000, p. 203.