Food appropriation during the Civil War. What is Prodrazvorstka? The meaning and interpretation of the word prodrazverstka, definition of the term. Provisional allocation after the February revolution

Provisional allocation in the documents of the era

The pages of the century are louder

Separate truths and lies.

We are the helmsmen of this book

A simple statutory font.

Boris Pasternak

The year 1919 did not bring relief to the peasants - however, and could not. No one has become easier in the country. The war flared up, the fronts became more extended, the army increased. A certain number of people could be taken from the cities, but everything else - food, fodder, horses - could only be supplied by the village. And with practically no return, since Soviet Russia, turned into a military camp, gave all its meager resources to the front.

In January 1919, a food distribution was introduced. It differed from the previous grain procurements in that the People's Commissariat for Food, based on the general needs of the country, determined solid tasks for the provinces for all types of agricultural products, the provinces were given it below - and so on to the volosts: as you want, do it. Theoretically, about 60% of the peasants were still freed from the surplus appropriation, but in reality, on the one hand, rich peasants sought many ways to distribute supplies to the entire village, and on the other, local authorities, falling into the pincers, either did not complete the task or shake everyone who has at least something - all the time, they took away bread not only from the middle peasants, but even from the poor.

Soon the state declared a monopoly on all foodstuffs. Mobilizations in the Red Army went one after another, labor duties increased. Horses were requisitioned for the army. The government, as best it could, protected the peasants - the third and further horse on the farm were subject to mobilization. But in practice, this instruction was not carried out, because each squadron commander had its own economic policy, quite often different from the state one. In addition, he had the right to replace a horse unsuitable for combat service with a good one even in a one-horse yard, and as a result, the horse population in the village was rapidly deteriorating. But the horse in the peasant's yard is not for aesthetics, it is necessary to work on it. But try to explain this to the aforementioned squadron commander!

Whites had the same problems - however, they controlled the richer areas and received outside support. The Reds could only rely on internal resources.

In 1920, a crop failure was added to other joys, which covered a number of provinces of Russia. For example, in the richest Tambov province, the surplus assignment amounted to a third of the total grain collection, which, in turn, covered the province's internal needs by only 50%. And you don't have to go to a fortune-teller grandmother to understand that the more bread is taken out for the surplus appropriation, the more it will have to be imported as a help to the hungry. And since the population of the province survived that winter, therefore, wagons with bread were driven in both directions. But there was an exacerbation of the permanent Tambov uprising, the elimination of which had to spend a lot of effort and money.

Fortunately, it was at this time that the rich provinces, captured from the whites, in particular Siberia, joined Soviet Russia. The main burden of the surplus appropriation fell on them. The local population, of course, did not like it - is it any wonder? So the winter of 1920-1921. marked also by the colossal West Siberian uprising. However, more on that later.

What was this constantly remembered Bolshevik surplus appropriation system? Historical mythology considers it to be a complete requisition of all food from the peasants - survive as you like. In fact, of course, this was not at all the case.

From the decree of the Tyumen Provincial Executive Committee and the Collegium of the Provincial Food Committee on the allocation of grain forage and oilseeds on September 3, 1920.

"1. The entire amount of grain, grain fodder and oilseeds, with the exception of the norm, is subject to surrender to the state and is deployed for alienation from the population between the volosts according to the attached tables ...

4. The entire amount of bread, grain fodder and oilseeds in the parish should be alienated from the population at fixed prices and handed over by the population to the collection point within the time specified below ...

11. To those volosts that have surpluses and stubbornly do not surrender them, to take repressive measures in whole volosts and individual villages in the form of arresting chairmen, secretaries of volosts and village councils for their assistance and all individuals who stubbornly do not hand over bread or harbor it, to arrest and to forward it to the visiting session of the Food Revolutionary Tribunal ”.

As you can see, everything is the same here - both norms and grain prices. The front line remained in the same place.

From the instructions of the Tyumen Provincial Food Committee on the grain and forage allocation. September 8, 1920

"4. The rate that must be left when calculating the grain allocation:

a) family members - 13 poods. 20 pounds, b) for sowing - 12 pounds, working horses - 19 pounds, d) foals - 5 pounds, e) cows - 5 pounds, f) calves - 5 pounds, etc. (Siberian norm even more than that established in May 1918. - E. P.)

5. After the determination of the appropriation system for each village separately, the members of the executive committee go to the places in the society and, according to the household lists, make the state and internal allotment for individuals.

After the allocation is carried out, personal lists are drawn up indicating: which society, name, surname, the amount of bread to be delivered, in what the subscription is selected, which determines the deadline ...

6. When calculating for individuals, it is allowed to leave the rate for feeding livestock on the farm:

1) from one to 3 dessiatines - per horse, from 4 to 6 dessiatines - per horse and one foal, from 6 to 10 dessiatines. - for 2 horses and 2 foals, from 11 to 15 dess. - for 3 horses and 3 foals, etc.

2) the norm for livestock with one person is not left, with 2–3 people - for one calf, 4–5–6 and 7 - one cow and one calf, 8–9-10–11 people - for 2 cows and 2 calves, 12-13-14 and 15 people - 3 cows and 3 calves, etc. ”.

The percentage of poor people in the Tyumen province is unknown. But they were, of course, and they had to be fed. Therefore, in addition to the state appropriation, the internal appropriation was carried out.

From the instructions of the Tyumen Provincial Food Committee on the implementation of the internal grain and forage allocation. 12 October 1920

“§ 2. According to the method of providing bread, the population is divided into groups: a) producers provided by leaving them with the products collected in their farms according to the norm of the People's Commissariat of Food ... b) the population living in rural areas, but not engaged in agriculture, c) the population leading it in sizes that do not meet the annual food needs of farms.

§ 3. The rural population of the province, which does not have its own reserves or is provided with them for a period of less than one year, is supplied ... at the expense of the surplus left by the producers in excess of the amount required to fulfill the state appropriation and own consumption ...

§ 6. In parallel with the state appropriation allotment, internal allotment is carried out, that is, the extraction of the surplus left over from the kulaks, the middle peasant and the poor peasant in excess of the amount after the allotment is fulfilled and their needs are satisfied at the rate.

§ 7. All bread (wheat, rye, oats, barley, peas and cereals), which turned out to be in surplus during the internal appropriation, goes to the volost cooperative according to the announced firm flails for bread ...

§ 15. In order to receive rations, the village councils draw up lists of households that really need bread, indicating the number of eaters and the amount of missing bread - food and sowing separately - and submit them to the executive committees ...

Section 20. Until the organization of the rationing system in the county, at each dispensing of food, the volco-operative draws up a special list of those who receive rations, in which all those who receive food are signed ...

§ 21. The release of products must be carried out strictly in accordance with the established norms - not more than 30 pounds per consumer per month - and at fixed prices established by the provincial food committee ”.

This was the state policy towards the peasants of the 1920 model. However, what kind of politics is there ?! This is the practice of a besieged fortress: to collect all the food and divide it among all in order to somehow survive until spring ...

... So, first the state assignment, then the internal redistribution of bread in order to protect the local population from hunger. At fixed prices, it is necessary to rent, and to buy at them. Surely for someone, the surplus appropriation was even beneficial - if there was an undershoot with the assignment and there was more than the norm for its completion of bread and other products. The opposite also happened - the task was overwhelming. What is more often unknown, for the peasants, of course, always swore and swore that the bread was not ugly, not threshed, there was nothing to surrender, and they themselves would certainly starve to death. To understand the situation: this was stated by everyone and always, regardless of the actual amount of bread. Moreover, there was a direct reason for this: you shout a little, quickly completed the task - and look, they still open up, for those who did not pass. It's easier for Gubprodkom ...

So the food workers had to solve the most difficult economic and psychological puzzles. And they had twenty-five years of life behind them, of which three to six were in the war, the parish school and either revolutionary firearms honesty, or criminal habits, or philistine selfishness. What's worse is a philosophical question ...

... It was equally useless to call Siberian peasants to state thinking and tell them about their starving compatriots. The bread had to be taken by force. The main permissible punitive measures were the blockade of goods, fines, confiscation of property, then hostage-taking was added here.

The commodity blockade is an understandable thing. Industrial goods were not released to villages that did not fulfill the assignment for food appropriation. The fourth measure is reflected in the following document.

Resolution No. 59 of the provincial control and inspection commission on the conduct of food appropriation in the Ishim district. At the earliest December 21, 1920

“We, the undersigned, members of the provincial control and inspection commission on state appropriations in the Tyumen province ... drew up a present resolution on the members of the Zhagrinsky village council: chairman - Perezhogin Alexander Danilovich and members - Perezhogin Pavel Eremeevich, Lunev Fedor Fedotovich and Perezhogin named Anton that the above Zhagrinsky village council, until December 21, did not make the allocation of grain allocation to individual householders and refused to spread such at the request of the provincial commission. The chairman of the village council currently had 7 barns of unmilled bread, 60 poods in grain, he did not take out a single pound to the state and refused to take it out ... Also, members of the Zhagrinsky village council categorically refused to execute the appropriation.

The regional commission decided: the members of the Zhagrinsky village council Perezhogin Alexander, Perezhogin Anton, Lunev Fedor should be arrested and sent to the Petukhovskaya food office to work as hostages until all the state appropriations for the Zhagrinsky society are completed, then the member of the council Perezhogin Anton - for 14 days in administrative order with imprisonment ".

Well, yes, we thought that if they were taken hostage, then they would certainly go to a concentration camp and would certainly be shot. As you can see, it is not at all necessary. I wonder why Pavel was not touched, and Anton was given two more weeks of imprisonment? Maybe the first one decided to hand over the bread, and the second hit someone from the bosses in the teeth?

For those who were especially stubborn and resisted, they used such a measure as confiscation. By the way, what is its punitive meaning is still a big question. Here is what is written at the disposal of a member of the board of the provincial food committee Myers:

"You must firmly remember that the appropriation must be carried out without regard for the consequences, up to the confiscation of all the grain in the countryside, leaving the producers with a hungry ration."

Well, how do you want to understand this? How does this measure differ from the allocation - everything is taken there, except for the norm, and here too. I have only one answer - they pay money for the products taken according to the allocation.

Property confiscations were very diverse. Judging by the documents, the usual measure is the confiscation of a quarter of the property, less often of half. If a person put up armed resistance or organized others, they could take everything, but also in a very peculiar way.

“2) Confiscate all their property from those who took part in the riot ...

Note: Property should be subject to confiscation only that which belongs to the person who participated in the riot, but not to his family members. If it is impossible to determine what property is the property of the family of the participant in the riot (for example, in relation to livestock or implements) and is necessary for the family to maintain its economy, the determination of the part owed to the family is made by the district executive committee or volrevkom and is left to the family, and the rest is confiscated ... "

When I try to understand what it looked like in practice, my imagination simply fails me.

Where did the confiscated things go? Food was sent to the warehouses, on account of the allocation, but with livestock and implements they did it differently.

“The confiscation of property, according to Order No. 6, from 39 people arrested for opposing state appropriation schemes and participating in a counter-revolutionary uprising on this basis, is over. Horses, sleighs and harness from the amount confiscated are distributed by the Aromashevsk Revolutionary Committee to the families of the Red Army soldiers and the poor of the volost ”.

The problem of illegal confiscations is also right next to it. If they were recognized as such (and this happened quite often), then the property was subject to return, and then the poor who received it were already rearing up. Tied knots of accounts, which would begin to be cut, as soon as the West Siberian uprising came to Tyumen.

Another problem is storage. Peasants all over the country were outraged that the selected grain lay in heaps and rotted. Yes, it happened that he lay and rotted, and the taken cattle died, and the potatoes froze. Not always - but each such case echoed a thousand times over the villages. Of course, the evil Bolshevik authorities deliberately rotted food and felt great and pure joy from each spoiled pound.

“If things go like this with the supply of wagons and containers, the bread runs the risk of being left at the collection points. Taking into account that the bread of the year 20 harvest is of very poor quality and is poured with snow and ice, because the threshing is not done on time (or maybe also to weigh more? - E. P.), with the further absence of containers during the first thaw, we are in danger of a terrible catastrophe. The bread can catch on fire. And in this way, the possibility is not excluded that all bread in an amount of up to 1.5 million poods will be spoiled ... Further now we cannot say with certainty that the bread is no longer burning, since there is no way to check it with a probe, because the probe cannot be driven further on 3 arshins in depth, because below the bread is frozen ... "

But you can't hide such an outrage, and the peasants - who themselves carry the bread with ice, are not supplying them with food detachments! - Immediately they begin to shout that the grain is burning and there is nothing to take, since you do not know how to save.

There are two more documents on some of the nuances of prodrabotki at the junction of the detachment - the population.

From the report of A. Stepanov, a member of the provincial control and inspection commission for the conduct of food appropriation. November 1920

“I bring to your attention that the allocation for the Suerskaya Vol. were completely suspended due to the fact that the food detachment, which worked in the local volost under the leadership of Comrade. Babkina, did not have any work plans at all, but I am hiding my correct initiative. General searches were carried out, which could not yield any results. People are recruited for the most part from the philistine element, which brings complete disorganization to the villages. Drunkenness was noticed, and some members of the detachment were tied to the table by citizens while drunk. The detachment stood for two months, and, not looking at the orders, the peasants' bread was not threshed. I had to remove the detachment due to distrust of him ... "

“I… arrived at the Piniginskoe society with a detachment of 16 people and began to vigorously carry out state appropriations… which have not yet been withdrawn from the population. But after a few minutes the Pinega society grouped up in the amount of 200 people, several of them on top, and they came up to us with the aim of forbidding us to work, shouted counter-revolutionary words, refuted orders Soviet power…

In addition, they categorically declared to us that we would not give you bread to take out. And they threatened us with different cases, unless you stop the work. In addition, I several times suggested to the assembled citizens that the latter should not interfere with their work. But most of us shouted at my suggestions that get out before it's too late. "

In general, this is both bad and that is not good. How good is it? And not to pay taxes ...

... And again, historical mythology says that the elimination of the food appropriation policy was a forced measure - either the Bolsheviks themselves realized its futility, or the peasant uprisings forced the Council of People's Commissars to do it. True, before its cancellation, another event took place - such a small, inconspicuous one. And to say something - ugh! - about nothing…

The war is over! But this, again, means absolutely nothing, for it is well known that in its policy the Council of People's Commissars was guided exclusively by communist ideas and internal malice.

So, in the spring of 1921, almost immediately after the end of the main battles of the Civil War (but in no way as a result of this!), The surplus appropriation system was replaced by a tax in kind. Now a fixed part of the harvest was taken away from the peasant, no longer for money, but free of charge as a tax, while he could dispose of the rest at his own discretion.

Decree of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee on the replacement of food and raw materials allocation in kind. March 21, 1921

"1. To ensure correct and calm management of the economy on the basis of a more free disposal of the farmer with the products of his labor and his economic means, to strengthen the peasant economy and raise its productivity, as well as in order to accurately establish the state obligations that fall on farmers, appropriation as a way of state procurement of food, raw materials and forage is replaced by a tax in kind.

2. This tax must be less than the tax imposed up to now by means of allotment taxation. The amount of the tax must be calculated so as to cover the most essential needs of the army, urban workers and the non-agricultural population. The total amount of the tax should be constantly reduced, as the restoration of transport and industry will allow the Soviet government to receive agricultural products in exchange for factory and handicraft products.

3. The tax is levied in the form of a percentage or share deduction from the products produced on the farm, based on the accounting of the harvest, the number of eaters on the farm and the presence of livestock in it.

4. The tax must be progressive; the percentage of deductions for farms of middle peasants, low-powered farmers and for farms of urban workers should be reduced. The farms of the poorest peasants can be exempted from some, and in exceptional cases, from all types of taxes in kind.

Diligent peasant farmers who increase the sowing area on their farms, as well as increase the productivity of farms as a whole, receive benefits in fulfilling the in-kind tax. (...)

7. Responsibility for the fulfillment of the tax rests with each individual owner, and the organs of Soviet power are instructed to impose penalties on everyone who has not fulfilled the tax. Round-robin liability is canceled.

To control the application and implementation of the tax, organizations of local peasants are formed according to groups of payers of different amounts of tax.

8. All stocks of food, raw materials and fodder remaining with farmers after they fulfill the tax are at their complete disposal and can be used by them to improve and strengthen their economy, to increase personal consumption and to exchange for products of the factory and handicraft industry. and agricultural production. Exchange is allowed within the local economic turnover both through cooperative organizations and in markets and bazaars.

9. Those farmers who wish to surrender the surplus remaining with them after the tax is fulfilled to the state, in exchange for these voluntarily surplus surplus should be provided with consumer goods and agricultural implements. For this, a state permanent stock of agricultural implements and consumer goods is created both from products of domestic production and from products purchased abroad. For the latter purpose, a part of the state gold fund and a part of the procured raw materials are allocated.

10. The supply of the poorest rural population is carried out in the state order according to special rules. (...) "

The method of calculating the tax was determined in the decree on the tax in kind on bread, potatoes and oilseeds. Whoever needs its exact text can refer to the Izvestia newspaper dated April 21, 1921. And we here for a change and fun for the sake of revere him in poetic form, in the form of signatures to a series of posters. There have been such miracles in our art ...

From the book ... Para bellum! the author Mukhin Yuri Ignatievich

G.K. Zhukov in documents Top secret Order of the Minister Armed Forces USSR on June 9, 1946 No. 009 Moscow The Council of Ministers of the USSR by a resolution of June 3 of this year. Approved the proposal of the Supreme Military Council of June 1 to release the Marshal Soviet Union

From the book Going Into Eternity the author Lebedev Yuri Mikhailovich

The Siege of Leningrad in the Documents of the Freiburg Archive If anyone has not heard of the Wehrmacht archive, I can gladly tell you about it. It is located in the old German town of Freiburg in southwestern Germany. The city is surprisingly attractive and revered among the Germans. I say

From the book Reconstruction true history the author

26. Traces of alteration of six into five on old documents Here, for example, the engraving "Melancholy" by the famous Albrecht Durer, who allegedly lived in 1471-1528, fig. 67. In the upper right corner, a 4 by 4 magic square is drawn. The sum of the numbers in each line, n

From the book Daily Life of Paris in the Middle Ages by Roux Simone

Parisian streets in regulations Very soon, the city authorities decided to put things in order in the maintenance of streets, bridges and public buildings. Ordinances, royal letters and Parisian laws tried to streamline the use of public street space.

From the book Who slept through the beginning of the war? the author Kozinkin Oleg Yurievich

DATE JUNE 22 IN DOCUMENTS (how the western districts were put on alert and who is primarily responsible for the tragedy of June 22) Consider which Directives went to the western districts in the last week before June 22 and to what extent they confirm or deny

From book New chronology and the concept ancient history Russia, England and Rome the author Nosovsky Gleb Vladimirovich

The principle of fairness of "common places" in old documents Traces of true history and remnants of the original chronological tradition

From the book The Great Russian Revolution, 1905-1922 the author Dmitry Lyskov

4. Evolution of the crisis and measures to resolve it: cards, requisitions, food appropriation Since the beginning of the war, the growing food crisis has become one of the main topics of the legal press. The press at all levels - from provincial to central, put forward recipes for overcoming

From the book Reconstruction of True History the author Nosovsky Gleb Vladimirovich

From the book The Course of the Age of Aquarius. Apocalypse or rebirth the author Efimov Viktor Alekseevich

Chapter 1. From the worldview of the era of Pisces to the worldview of the age of Aquarius. Depressurizing Conceptual Power There is something stronger than all the troops in the world: it is an idea whose time has come. V. Hugo The worldview of any person can be attributed to one of two basic

From the book Three revolutions [draft of the book The Great Russian Revolution, 1905-1922] the author Dmitry Lyskov

11. Measures to resolve the food crisis: cards, requisitions, food appropriation Since the beginning of the war, the growing food crisis has become one of the main topics of the legal press. The press at all levels - from provincial to central, put forward recipes for overcoming

From the book Russian rebellion forever. 500 years of the Civil War the author Dmitry Taratorin

Civil in documents

From the book Diaries and Letters the author Trotsky Lev Davidovich

[L. TROTSKY] THE HISTORY OF THE EXPULSION OF LD TROTSKY IN DOCUMENTS Starting from the end of October, the correspondence of Trotsky, his wife and son, who were in Alma-Ata, was almost completely suspended. Even telegrams about health did not reach. On December 16, a representative of the GPU came from Moscow to

From the book Pre-Petrine Rus. Historical portraits. the author Fedorova Olga Petrovna

The image of Ivan IV in historical documents, literature and art Much paradoxical in the behavior of Ivan IV was noted by his contemporaries. Participation in torture and executions alternated with prayer. They say he sang in church choir... Ivan IV had a beautiful voice and showed

From the book WAS THERE LITHUANIA? the author Ivanov Valery Gergievich

About the historical documents of White Russia Why are we so little pleased with modern archival finds on the richest history Belarus? Why are there so few state, legal, economic, historical documents powerful and original Slavic

From the book of Ugres. Pages of history the author Egorova Elena Nikolaevna

Ugresha in archival documents The Russian State Archive of Ancient Acts (RGADA) and the Central Historical Archive of Moscow (TsIAM) contain many documents on the history of the Ugreshskaya monastery. At first glance, these papers, yellowed from time to time, are boring and uninteresting, but

From the book "If Peace Falls on Our Republic": Soviet Society and an External Threat in the 1920s-1940s. the author Golubev Alexander Vladimirovich

Application. "Military alert" 1927 in documents 1. Information sheet on the moods of workers and peasants on the question of the war (For the period from January 15 to February 8, 1927) (858) February 8, 1927 Comrade Mandelstam Bukharin and Voroshilov at the 15th Gubpartconference was summoned among

Prodrazvorstka

Prodrazvorstka(short for the phrase food layout) - in Russia, a system of state measures implemented during periods of military and economic crises, aimed at the implementation of procurement of agricultural products. The principle of surplus appropriation consisted in the obligatory delivery by producers to the state of the established ("expanded") norms of products at the prices set by the state.

For the first time the surplus appropriation system was introduced in the Russian Empire on December 2, 1916, at the same time, the previously operating system of public procurement on the free market was retained.

In connection with the low supply of grain from state procurements and surplus appropriation, on March 25, 1917, the Provisional Government introduced a grain monopoly, which assumed the transfer of the entire volume of grain produced, minus the established consumption rates, for personal and economic needs.

The "bread monopoly" was confirmed by the authority of the Council of People's Commissars by the Decree of May 9, 1918. Re-requisitioning was introduced by the Soviet government at the beginning of January 1919 in critical conditions civil war and devastation, as well as the food dictatorship in force since May 13, 1918. The surplus appropriation system became part of a set of measures known as the "war communism" policy. During the procurement campaign of the 1919-20 financial year, the surplus appropriation also extended to potatoes, meat, and by the end of 1920, almost all agricultural products.

The methods used for procurement during the period of the food dictatorship caused an increase in peasant discontent, which turned into armed actions of the peasants. On March 21, 1921, the surplus allocation was replaced by a tax in kind, which was the main measure of the transition to the NEP policy.

Revolution of 1917 in Russia
Public Processes
Before February 1917: Preconditions for the revolution February - October 1917: Democratizing the army Land issue After October 1917: Boycott of the government by civil servants Prodrazvorstka Diplomatic isolation of the Soviet government Russian Civil War The collapse of the Russian Empire and the formation of the USSR War communism
Institutions and organizations

Armed formations

Developments
February - October 1917: After October 1917:
Personalities

Related Articles

Prerequisites for the introduction

I must say that where there have already been cases of refusal or where there were imperfections, now they asked me from the localities what to do next: should I act as required by the law, which indicates a certain way out when rural or volost societies do not decree the sentence that is required of them for the performance of one or another duty or arrangement - whether this should be done, or should perhaps resort to requisition, also provided for by the resolution of the Special Conference, but I always and everywhere answered that here with this it is necessary to wait, it is necessary to wait: perhaps the mood of the gathering will change; it is necessary to reassemble it, point out to him the purpose for which this layout is intended, that this is exactly what the country and the motherland need for defense, and depending on the mood of the gathering, I thought that these resolutions would change. In this direction, voluntary, I recognized the need to exhaust all means.

The tight deadlines resulted in errors, which were expressed, in particular, in the deployment of more food than was available in a number of provinces. Others simply sabotaged them by significantly increasing consumption rates and leaving no visible surplus. The desire not to infringe on the parallel existing free purchase eventually led to the actual collapse of this venture, which required the willingness to sacrifice the masses of producers - which was not there - or the widespread use of requisitions - for which, in turn, the system was not ready.

Provisional allocation after the February revolution

After the February Revolution, on February 27, 1917, the Food Commission of the Provisional Government was organized. In the first two months of the Provisional Government's activity, the food policy was directed by the zemstvo doctor cadet A.I. Shingarev. The failure of the blanks led to disaster. At the beginning of March 1917 in Petrograd and Moscow there were grain reserves for several days and there were sections of the front with hundreds of thousands of soldiers where grain reserves were only for half a day. Circumstances forced them to act: on March 2, the Food Commission of the Provisional Government made a decision: “without stopping the usual purchases and receipt of bread according to the layout, immediately proceed with the requisition of grain from large landowners and tenants of all classes with a plow of at least 50 acres, as well as from trade enterprises and banks. " On March 25, 1917, the Law on the Transfer of Bread to the State (Bread Monopoly) was issued. According to him, “the entire amount of bread, food and fodder harvest of past years, 1916 and the future harvest of 1917, minus the stock necessary for food and household needs of the owner, comes from the time of taking the bread on the account, at the disposal of the state at fixed prices and can be alienated only through the state food authorities ”. That is, the state monopoly on all grain, except for its own consumption and economic needs, and the state monopoly on the grain trade. The norms of own consumption and economic needs were established by the same law, proceeding from the fact that: a) the amount of grain for sowing is left based on the sown area of the farm and the average seeding density according to the data of the Central Statistical Committee, with possible adjustment according to the zemstvo statistics. When using a seeder, the size is reduced by 20-40% (depending on the type of seeder); b) for food needs - for dependents at 1.25 poods per month, for adult workers - 1.5 poods. In addition, cereals, 10 spools per capita per day; c) for livestock - for workhorses - 8 pounds of oats or barley or 10 pounds of corn per day. For cattle and pigs, no more than 4 pounds per head per day. For young animals, the rate dropped by half. Feeding rates may have decreased locally; c) An additional 10% for each item (a, b, c) "just in case."

On April 29, the norms of supply according to the rationing system of the rest of the population, primarily the urban population, are also being streamlined. The maximum rate in cities and urban-type settlements is 30 pounds of flour and 3 pounds of cereals per month. For those engaged in hard work, a 50% premium was established.

On the same day, the "institution of emissaries with great powers" is established to carry out food policy on the ground and establish closer ties with the center.

The law of March 25 and the instruction issued on May 3 toughened the liability for hidden grain stocks subject to delivery to the state or refusal to hand over visible stocks. Upon discovery of hidden reserves, they were subject to alienation at a half fixed price, in case of refusal to voluntarily surrender visible reserves, they are forcibly alienated.

“This is an inevitable, bitter, sad measure,” Shingarev said, “to take the distribution of grain reserves into the hands of the state. This measure cannot be dispensed with. " Having confiscated the cabinet and specific lands, he postponed the question of the fate of the landowners' estates until the Constituent Assembly.

On July 1, the People's Commissariat for Food, by decree, instructs the local food authorities to register bread and set the dates for surpluses in accordance with the norms for leaving bread with the owners (March 25, 1917), but no more than until August 1, 1918.

On July 27, 1918, the People's Commissariat for Food adopted a special decree on the introduction of a widespread class food ration, divided into four categories, providing for measures to keep track of stocks and distribution of food.

By the decree of August 21, the surplus for the new harvest of 1918 was determined, based on the same norms for March 1917 for seed grain, for food the norms were reduced to 12 pounds of grain or flour and 3 pounds of cereals. Above the norms for each household up to 5 eaters - 5 poods, over 5 eaters +1 poods for each. The norms for livestock also decreased. As before, these norms could be lowered by the decision of local organizations.

The food authorities, the People's Commissariat of Industry and Tsyurupa personally were given extraordinary powers to supply the country with bread and other products. Relying on the cadre core of the People's Commissariat and old, experienced food workers, Tsyurupa is implementing the surplus appropriation system developed by the tsarist minister Rittich and the law on the grain monopoly passed by the cadet Shingarev.

The tough measures of grain collection recommended by Lenin in 1918 did not become widespread. People's Commissariat for Food was looking for more flexible methods his withdrawals, which would have less embittered the peasants and could give the maximum result. As an experiment, a number of provinces began to use a system of agreements, contracts of food authorities with the peasants through the Soviets and kombeda on the voluntary surrender of grain by them with payment for part of it in goods. For the first time, the experiment was tested in the summer in the Vyatka province by A.G. Shlikhter. In September, he applied it in the Efremov district of the Tula province, having achieved a significant result in those conditions. Earlier, in the Efremov district, food workers could not feed their workers and the poor even with the help of extraordinary commissars and military force.

Schlichter's experience showed that an agreement can be reached with the peasants on condition careful attitude to their needs, understanding of their psychology, respect for their work. Trust in the peasants, joint discussion with them difficult question determining surpluses, firmly pursuing one's own line without threats and arbitrariness, fulfilling the promises made, helping them as much as possible - all this met with understanding among the peasants, brought them closer to participating in the solution of the national cause. Explanation, help, business control were most appreciated by the peasants.

The contractual spreading method provided a guaranteed collection of grain. He partially practiced in other provinces - Penza, Kaluga, Pskov, Simbirsk. However, in Kazan province, the use of agreements with peasants gave only 18% of the surplus collection. Here, in the organization of the layout, a serious violation of the class principle was committed - the taxation was carried out on an equalizing basis.

Low grain receipts, even with the beginning of the harvest, led to hunger in industrial centers. To alleviate hunger among the workers of Moscow and Petrograd, the government went to a temporary violation of the grain monopoly, allowing them to purchase at free prices and transport one and a half poods of grain by private means for five weeks, from August 24 to October 1, 1918. Permission to transport one and a half poods. used by 70% of the population of Petrograd, purchasing or exchanging for things 1,043,500 poods of bread

In total, 73 628 thousand poods of grain (43 995) cereals (4347) and grain fodder (25 628) were procured in 1918 - of which 10 533 thousand poods were procured before May 1918 - including 7205 thousand poods of bread and 132 thousand poods of cereals. Nevertheless, the fulfillment of procurement plans was extremely low (the Provisional Government planned for 1918 to procure 440 million poods) and the methods of "unlimited" grain procurements in the field, in many cases looking like robbery and banditry, provoked active opposition from the peasantry, which grew in a number of places into armed uprisings. anti-Bolshevik subtext.

Grain procurement policies and practices of other regimes during the Civil War

By the fall of 1918, the territory of the former Russian Empire, which was under the control of the Bolshevik Soviets, was no more than 1/4 of its original size. Until the end of the large-scale operations of the Civil War, various territories of the former Russian Empire passed from hand to hand and were controlled by forces of various orientations - from monarchists to anarchists. These regimes, in the case of more or less prolonged control over the territory, also formed their own food policy.

Ukraine

The surplus allocation was again introduced by the Bolsheviks during the Civil War on January 11, 1919. (Decree on the introduction of surplus appropriation for bread) and became part of Soviet politics building communism.

By a decree of the Council of People's Commissars of January 11, 1919, the introduction of the surplus appropriation system was announced throughout the territory of Soviet Russia, but in reality the surplus allocation was carried out at first only in the central provinces controlled by the Bolsheviks: in Tula, Vyatka, Kaluga, Vitebsk, etc. Only as the control of the Bolsheviks over the rest of the territories later spread surplus allocation was carried out in the Ukraine (early April 1919), in Belarus (1919), Turkestan and Siberia (1920). In accordance with the decree of the People's Commissariat for Food of January 13, 1919 on the procedure for deployment, state planning targets were calculated on the basis of provincial data on the size of sown areas, yields, and stocks of previous years. In the provinces, the layout was carried out by counties, volosts, villages, and then between individual peasant farms. Only in 1919 did improvements in the efficiency of the state food apparatus become noticeable. The collection of products was carried out by the organs of the People's Commissariat for Food, food detachments with the active help of the commanders (until their termination at the beginning of 1919) and local Soviets. Initially, the surplus was extended to bread and grain fodder. In the procurement campaign (1919-20), it also covered potatoes, meat, and by the end of 1920 - almost all agricultural products.

In addition, when determining the size of the spread, they did not proceed from the actual food surpluses of the peasants, but from the food needs of the army and the urban population, therefore, not only the surplus available, but very often the entire seed fund and agricultural products necessary to feed the peasant himself were withdrawn locally.

The discontent and resistance of the peasants during the confiscation of food was suppressed by the armed detachments of the committees of the poor, as well as by the special forces of the Red Army (CHON) and detachments of the Prodarmia.

After the suppression of the active resistance of the peasants to the surplus appropriation system, the Soviet authorities had to face passive resistance: the peasants withheld grain, refused to accept the money that had lost their purchasing power, reduced the sown area and production, so as not to create useless surpluses for themselves, and produced products only in accordance with the consumer norm for their own. family.

As a result of the surplus appropriation for the procurement campaign of 1916-1917, 832309 tons of grain were collected, up to October revolution 1917 The Provisional Government collected 280 million poods (out of 720 planned) for the first 9 months of Soviet power - 5 million centners; for 1 year of surplus allocation (1 / VIII 1918-1 / VIII 1919) - 18 million centners; 2nd year (1 / VIII 1919-1 / VIII 1920) - 35 million centners 3rd year (1 / VIII 1920-1 / VIII 1921) - 46.7 million centners.

Weather data on grain procurements for this period: 1918/1919 −1767780 tons; 1919/1920 −3480200 tons; 1920/1921 - 6,011,730 tons.

Despite the fact that the surplus appropriation system allowed the Bolsheviks to solve the vital problem of supplying food to the Red Army and the urban proletariat, in connection with the ban on the free sale of grain and grain, commodity-money relations significantly decreased, which began to slow down the post-war economic recovery, and in agriculture, sowing crops began to decline. area, yield and gross collection. This was due to the lack of interest of the peasants to produce products that were practically taken away from them. In addition, surplus allocation in

95 years ago, on January 11, 1919, the Council of People's Commissars adopted a decree on the introduction of food appropriation.

In the procurement campaign of the 1919-1920 economic year, the surplus appropriation spread not only to bread, but also to potatoes and meat, and by the end of 1920 - to almost all agricultural products.

Food appropriation became one of the main hardships for peasants during the war communism, putting millions of families on the brink of starvation. The soldiers of the food detachments turned into the main enemies in the eyes of the majority of the peasants.

Food was confiscated from the peasants virtually free of charge, since the banknotes that were offered as payment were almost completely devalued, and the state could not offer industrial goods to replace the seized grain. When determining the size of the appropriation, they proceeded not from the actual surplus of food from the peasants, but from the needs of the army and the urban population for food, so they often seized not only the surplus, but also the seed fund.

On March 21, 1921, the surplus appropriation system was replaced by a tax in kind, which marked the beginning of the transition to a new economic policy(NEP).

DECREE of the Council of People's Commissars of the RSFSR on the exploration of grain breads and forage, subject to alienation at the disposal of the state, between the producing provinces of January 11, 1919
In order to urgently supply grain for the needs of the Red Army and grain-free regions and in development of the decrees of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee on grain monopoly and tax in kind, the following procedure is established for the alienation of surplus grain and fodder at the disposal of the state.
Art. 1. The entire amount of grain and grain fodder required to meet state needs is allocated for the alienation of the population between the producing provinces.
Art. 2. The provinces to which the appropriation applies, as well as the amount of grain and grain fodder, subject to alienation in each province, are established by the People's Commissar for Food in accordance with the size of the harvest, reserves and consumption rates.
Art. 3. The allotment shall include the entire amount of seed and food grain, as well as grain fodder, already procured by the food authorities according to the orders of the People's Commissariat of Food.
Art. 4. To the allotment set by the People's Commissariat of Food, by order of the provincial food committees, the amount of bread and grain fodder necessary for the needs of the local, both urban and peasant population, which does not have their own grain in the required norm, is added.
Art. 5. The general basis for the allotment is established by the People's Commissariat for Food.
Art. 6. The entire amount of bread and grain fodder due to the province according to the appropriation, in accordance with Art. 4 must be alienated from the population at fixed prices and delivered by June 15, 1919.
Art. 7. Seventy percent of the total amount of grain and fodder due to the gubernia according to the appropriation system must be delivered by March 1, 1919.
Art. 8. The People's Commissar for Food is given the right, depending on the types for the upcoming harvest, to reduce the amount to be supplied after March 1.
Art. 9. Farmers who have surrendered at least seventy percent by March 1 and by June 15 the rest of the grain and grain fodder demanded from them for appropriation are exempt from tax in kind.
Art. 10. Rural owners who have not handed over the amount of grain fodder due to them by the due date are subject to compulsory expropriation of the stocks found in their possession free of charge. Severe measures are applied to the stubborn of them and maliciously hiding their reserves, up to the confiscation of property and imprisonment by the verdicts of the people's court.

Note. The procedure and the right to appeal against the inappropriateness of the appropriation system is established by the People's Commissariat for Food.
Chairman of the Council of People's Commissars V. Ulyanov (Lenin) Deputy People's Commissar Bryukhanov Administrator of the Council of People's Commissars V. Bonch-Bruevich Secretary of the Council of People's Commissars L. Fotieva Decrees of Soviet power, vol. 4. M., 1968, p. 292-294. 1. This refers to the decrees of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee and the Council of People's Commissars of May 13, 1918 on the emergency powers of the People's Commissar for Food and of October 30, 1918 on imposing a natural tax on farmers in the form of deducting a portion of agricultural products. 2. In the original: Commissioner.

On January 11, 1919, the Council of People's Commissars adopted a decree, which introduced food appropriation throughout the entire territory of the RSFSR. The essence of the surplus appropriation consisted in the forced surrender by all peasants of all "surplus" food products that exceeded the minimum norms for a family, to the state, which purchased them at fixed prices.
Despite the fact that the surplus appropriation system is usually associated with the Bolsheviks, in fact, a similar practice was applied earlier.
For the first time, the phenomenon of surplus appropriation became known back in the Russian Empire during the First World War, when the army and industry, working for the military, were provided with such a forced retention of bread. Similar Soviet decree the decree was signed on November 29, 1916.
In addition, the Provisional Government also supported this practice, adopting a law on the state monopoly on bread, although it recognized the severity of these measures, nevertheless, they were considered necessary. The essence of this law consisted in significant government intervention in the economy, in particular in the establishment of fixed prices, regulation of the distribution of products and their production.
Despite the existence of the law, it was never destined to be realized, since the influence of the Provisional Government was fading away more and more. So the surplus appropriation system was destined to become famous for the next successors - the Bolsheviks. Despite the slogans "The land to the peasants!"
Lenin personally spoke of the surplus appropriation system as the basis on which the entire policy of War Communism was based. As he wrote in one of his works, the essence of war communism was that the peasants were taken away "surplus" food in exchange for depreciating money to maintain the military-industrial complex. At the same time, Lenin admitted that in individual cases the peasants were not even deprived of the surplus, but part of the food they needed for living, since the calculations were carried out on the basis of the immediate needs of the army, and were regulated by plans for food appropriation. All this was justified by the need for the victory of the revolution, no matter what.
It will be fair to say that this practice of confiscating food from the people was carried out by all political and military forces that took part in the civil war on the territory of the former Russian Empire.
The allocation was carried out by the organs of the People's Commissariat for Food, the so-called food detachments, with the assistance of the committees of the poor and local authorities... At the first stage in late 1918 - early 1919, surplus appropriation actually took place only in those areas where Soviet power was already firmly held, namely in the regions of Central Russia, while covering only bread and grain. However, a year later, food appropriation became a harsh reality on the entire territory of Russian, Ukrainian, Belarusian and several others. Soviet republics, and covered almost all products.
The bottom line is that, despite the formal "purchase" of surplus from the peasants, in fact the appropriation was carried out free of charge, since the money was completely depreciated, and there were simply no manufactured goods for exchange.
The resistance of the peasants was suppressed with the help of weapons both by the commissar and the detachments of the Prodarmia, and by special units of the Red Army. With the impossibility of power resistance, it acquired the character of a "partisan", that is, a passive struggle. So the peasants hid food, reduced crops, leaving just enough to feed themselves and their family, and did not have to work on the surplus, which they would take away anyway.
The essence of the surplus appropriation system was to feed the army and the proletariat at the expense of the peasants, thus, figuratively speaking, to sacrifice Agriculture to preserve the conquests of the Bolsheviks and industry. The policy of war communism and the surplus appropriation system in particular, led to dire consequences in the economy and in the social sphere. Due to the rapid depreciation of money, the ban on the trade in bread and the naturalization of wages, there was a sharp narrowing of economic interaction in society, commodity-money relations were replaced by barter and degraded. Thus, instead of the planned recovery National economy, its systematic elimination took place. Not only economic and trade, but also social ties were violated - as a result of multiple uprisings, any trust of the peasants in the Soviet regime was lost, and relations in general between peasants and workers deteriorated sharply. All this led to the fact that in the spring of 1921 the food appropriation campaign was discontinued and replaced by a fixed tax in kind - these were the first steps to implement the next stage in the formation of the USSR - the NEP period.

Providing the population with food before the First World War was a matter of private initiative, and the state practically did not interfere in it. If, before the abolition of serfdom, the landowners were charged with the obligation to provide food for their peasants in the years of famine, then in 1861 this obligation was removed from them and transferred to the village elders. Urban inhabitants had to take care of their food on their own.

With the outbreak of the First World War, the amount of food needed to provide for the population grew rapidly, while agricultural production declined everywhere due to the diversion of workers to the army. Accordingly, in the conditions of a free market, food prices also grew - compared to 1913, the price in 1915 increased 1.8-2 times, and by 1916 the cost in the non-black earth zone had already increased 3 times. In 1917, prices increased 16-18 times. If at the beginning of the war it was necessary to feed an ever-increasing army - 6.5 million people (at the end of 1914), 11.7 million people (1915), 14.4 (1916) and 15.1 million in 1917, then from 1915 year, the state had to take upon itself the provision of the civilian population of a number of cities and, in part, provinces.

All this forced the then government to attend to providing the population with food. In connection with the intensification of the food crisis, the government is forced to undertake a reform of the food organization. Its chairman was given the right to set maximum prices for products by the Regulations of November 27, 1915. The introduction of firm purchase prices was caused by speculative supply in the market with a significant increase in the volume of planned purchases. By April 6, 1916, a regional network of provincial, regional, city and district meetings was created. The plenipotentiaries who headed them also had the right to requisition and prohibit the export of food. From October 1915 to February 1916, there were about 60 cases of requisition, which were applied in connection with the refusal to deliver products at fixed prices. As the food crisis grew, in the spring of 1916, the rationing system began to be introduced in the cities - as of July 13, it operated in eight provinces.

On November 29, 1916, the head of the Ministry of Agriculture Alexander Rittich signed a decree “ About the appropriation of grain crops and fodder purchased for defense-related needs", Which was published on December 2, 1916. In accordance with this decree, on the basis of the rear and reserve military units, special food battalions were to be created, which were supposed to wool the rural men for the presence of food surpluses.

Soon after February revolution On March 25, 1917, the Provisional Government introduced a grain monopoly, which implied the transfer of the entire volume of grain produced, minus the established consumption rates, for personal and economic needs, and on August 20, 1917, a circular was issued on the armed confiscation of grain from large owners and all producers from the nearest railway stations villages. However, this circular was applied hesitantly, and before the October Revolution of 1917, the Provisional Government collected only 280 million poods out of the 650 million planned.

As strange as it may sound, with the coming to power of the Bolsheviks, the food policy has softened greatly. The People's Commissariat for Food was looking for more flexible methods of its withdrawal, which would less embitter the peasants and could give the maximum result. As an experiment, a number of provinces began to use a system of agreements, contracts of food authorities with the peasants through the Soviets and kombeda on the voluntary surrender of grain by them with payment for part of it in goods. For the first time, the experiment was tested in the summer in the Vyatka province by the extraordinary food commissioner Alexander. Schlichter. In September, he applied it in the Efremov district of the Tula province, having achieved a significant result in those conditions. Earlier, in the Efremov district, food workers could not feed their workers and the poor even with the help of extraordinary commissars and military force. Schlichter's experience showed that an agreement can be reached with peasants provided that they are attentive to their needs, understanding their psychology, and respect for their work. Trust in the peasants, joint discussion with them on the difficult issue of determining surpluses, firmly pursuing their line without threats and arbitrariness, fulfilling the promises made, and helping them as much as possible - all this met with understanding among the peasants, brought them closer to participation in the solution of the national cause. Explanation, help, business control were most appreciated by the peasants. The contractual spreading method provided a guaranteed collection of grain. He partially practiced in other provinces - Penza, Kaluga, Pskov, Simbirsk. However, in Kazan province, the use of agreements with peasants gave only 18% of the surplus collection. Here, in the organization of the layout, a serious violation of the class principle was committed - the taxation was carried out on an equalizing basis. Low grain receipts, even with the beginning of the harvest, led to hunger in industrial centers. To alleviate hunger among the workers of Moscow and Petrograd, the government went to a temporary violation of the grain monopoly, allowing them, according to the certificates of enterprises, to purchase at free prices and transport one and a half poods of grain by private means for five weeks - from August 24 to October 1, 1918. Permission to transport one and a half poods 70% of the population of Petrograd took advantage of, purchasing or exchanging for things 1,043,500 poods of bread In total, in 1918, 73,628 thousand poods of grain (43,995) cereals (4347) and grain fodder (25,628) were procured - of which 10,533 thousand poods was procured until May 1918 - including 7205 thousand poods of bread and 132 thousand poods of cereal. Nevertheless, the fulfillment of procurement plans was extremely low.

The surplus allocation was again introduced by the Bolsheviks during the Civil War on January 11, 1919. By decree of the Council of People's Commissars, it was introduced throughout Russia. In reality, surplus appropriation was initially carried out only in the central provinces controlled by the Bolsheviks.

Nevertheless, the volume of grain procurements increased sharply. If from August 1918 to August 1919 1,767,780 tons of grain were procured, then for the same period 1919/1920. - 3480200 tons, and for 1920/1921. - 6,011,730 tons.

The collection of products was carried out by the organs of the People's Commissariat for Food, food detachments with the active help of local Soviets. Initially, the surplus was extended to bread and grain fodder. In the procurement campaign (1919-20), it also covered potatoes, meat, and by the end of 1920 - almost all agricultural products.

The surplus appropriation system allowed the Bolsheviks to solve the vital problem of supplying food to the Red Army and the urban proletariat. She saved millions of workers and employees from starvation. But it was an emergency measure, and soon after the end of the war on March 21, 1921, it was replaced by a food tax.

based on wikipedia