In order to reach this haven of safety it is necessary to pass through a period of transition, in which there are some formidable difficulties.  One of these I may mention by way of illustration.

In creating parliamentary institutions of any kind the Government could hardly leave intact the present system of allowing the police to arrest without a proper warrant, and send into exile without trial, any one suspected of revolutionary designs.  On this point all the Opposition groups are agreed, and all consequently put forward prominently the demand for the inviolability of person and domicile.  To grant such a concession seems a very simple and easy matter, but any responsible minister might hesitate to accept such a restriction of his authority.  We know, he would argue, that the terrorist section of the Socialist-Revolutionary group, the so-called Militant Organisation, are very busy preparing bombs, and the police, even with the extensive, ill-defined powers which they at present possess, have the greatest difficulty in preventing the use of such objectionable instruments of political warfare.  Would not the dynamiters and throwers of hand-grenades utilise a relaxation of police supervision, as they did in the time of Louis Melikof,* for carrying out their nefarious designs?

     * Vide supra, p. 569.

I have no desire to conceal or minimise such dangers, but I believe they are temporary and by no means so great as the dangers of the only other alternatives—­energetic repression and listless inactivity.  Terrorism and similar objectionable methods of political warfare are symptoms of an abnormal, unhealthy state of society, and would doubtless disappear in Russia, as they have disappeared in other countries, with the conditions which produced them.  If the terrorists continued to exist under a more liberal regime, they would be much less formidable, because they would lose the half-concealed sympathy which they at present enjoy.

Political assassinations may occasionally take place under the most democratic governments, as the history of the United States proves, but terrorism as a system is to be found only in countries where the political power is concentrated in the hands of a few individuals; and it sometimes happens that irresponsible persons are exposed to terrorist attacks.  We have an instance of this at present in St. Petersburg.  The reluctance of the Emperor to adopt at once a Liberal programme is commonly attributed to the influence of two members of the Imperial family, the Empress Dowager and the Grand Duke Vladimir.  This is a mistake.  Neither of these personages is so reactionary as is generally supposed, and their political views, whatever they may be, have no appreciable influence on the course of affairs.  If the Empress Dowager had possessed the influence so often ascribed to her, M. Plehve would not have remained so long in power.  As for the Grand Duke Vladimir, he is not in favour, and for nearly two years he has never been consulted on political matters.  The so-called Grand Ducal party of which he is supposed to be the leader, is a recently invented fiction.  When in difficulties the Emperor may consult individually some of his near relatives, but there is no coherent group to which the term party could properly be applied.