The Civil Code of Soviet Russia

Abstract

At the fourth session of the ninth Congress of the All Russian Central Executive Committee of the Soviets, held in October, i922, the Civil Code was passed, to take effect on the first of January, 1923. The very fact of the adoption of a code of laws intended to uphold and regulate private property relations in Soviet Russia is a striking indication of the departure of the governing party from the communistic experiment which had been carried on by it during the first three and a half years of its rule. The ideas underlying that experiment justified a system of universal nationalization of all economic relations in the business life of the country, in the domain of production as well as in that of distribution. All forms of extractive and manufacturing industry, all forms of commercial intercourse, the means of production, not only of large scale industry, but even of the small handicrafts, all stocks of raw materials and manufactured products, all real propertynot only that intended for industrial purposes but that intended for dwelling purposes as well-in short, all material goods were exempt from private ownership and were subject to nationalization. All things were to be under the full control of the state, which thus appeared as the only subject of property rights vested with the exclusive authority to manage all matters pertaining to the industrial life of the country. The realization of that system in practice was not confined tohnationalization in the scientific sense of the socialist theory, that is, to the socialization of productive forces and relations, but under the influence of revolutionary slogans, was supplemented by confiscation of personal property intended for household needs and personal consumption, such as furniture, wearing apparel, money in Russian and foreign currency, ornaments, pictures, books, and so forth. All that in excess of a fixed amount, and at times regardless of any fixed amount, was subject to be removed from private ownership. Of private property relations there could be no question, since with the abolition of private property even within the household, the citizen being in effect deprived of the power to enter contractual relations, both fundamental elements of private property relations-the subject as well as the object thereof-were destroyed. Private property relations were destroyed even in that field which generally does not lend itself to socialization, namely, in the field of personal labor. This was accomplished by the militarization of labor and by the practice of the labor duty, wherein the relations between the state as employer and the wage earners and salaried employees, that is