Organization of service for the protection and escort of persons detained in the Russian Empire in the period 1718-1917 on the example of the Peter and Paul Fortress.

Soloveichik Maksim Vyacheslavovich PhD in Pedagogy Associate Professor of the Department of Organization of Police Work, St. Petersburg University of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia 192283, Russia, Saint Petersburg region, Saint Petersburg, Pilutova str., 1, room 410 soloveychik1977@gmail.com Other publications by this author

The relevance of conducting a study on the organization of the service for the protection and escort of persons in custody is determined by the significance of this type of activity in modern conditions. After all, the success of other law enforcement agencies depends on the effectiveness of this work.

After all, as it is rightly stated in the "Review of emergency incidents committed in 2022 in the activities of the security and convoy service units", one of the indicators of the indicator of the state program for combating crime is the number of escapes committed in a certain period of time. That is, every case of escape causes anxiety in society, and their absence, on the contrary, brings peace and confidence in the security provided by the country's law enforcement agencies.

In connection with the above, it becomes important to study the historical experience of organizing the service for the protection and escort of persons in custody, to trace the transformation of this experience and the change in tactical techniques for its improvement over a considerable period of time, so that some moments in modernity could be excluded, and some used to improve practical activities on security and escorting.

The study of these features, according to the author, using the example of guarding and escorting a sufficiently well–known place of detention in Russia – the Peter and Paul Fortress, is justified and confirmed by evidence from many historical sources - both from detainees and law enforcement officers.

The historical period from 1718 to 1917 will be considered as a temporary period, as it received the maximum representation of contemporaries.

The author deliberately did not study departmental documents on the organization of service, but focused specifically on memoirs written by authors who are not related to the organization of security and escort service for special objectivity in assessing its organization.

In the extensive literature devoted to the activities of the Peter and Paul Fortress, issues related to the conditions of detention, as well as the specifics of the organization of security and escort in it, have received quite detailed coverage.

At various times, Anisimov E.V., Semenovsky M.I., Kropotkin P.A., Babkin D.S., Rosen A.E., Volkonsky S.G., Shchegolev P. S. And others devoted their works to this topic. Some of the authors were eyewitnesses of the time period studied by the author, and some studied it later.

For a detailed acquaintance with them, the author turned to the materials of the State Museum of the History of St. Petersburg, as well as to the memoirs of participants in the events related to the activities of this place of detention and to some other documents.

Studying the history of the experience of organizing the activities of places of detention in our country is necessary to understand the origins of the requirements for the security and escort service and its organization for the protection and escort of persons held in modern similar institutions.

The first mention of the Peter and Paul Fortress as a place of detention can be found in the spring of 1718, when, according to the garrison magazine, "a dungeon was committed in it." Peter 1 is considered to be the founder of this institution.^[2]

According to the "Small Academic Dictionary", the dungeon is a place of torture during investigation and interrogation. At the same time, it must be remembered that torture in the Russian Empire of the 18th century was a common form of inquiry or investigation, therefore, a dungeon would be defined in modern terms as a place of investigation in a case in which a particular person is accused, which brings him as close as possible to a modern place of detention, which has similar functions in a more humane accompanied. ^[1]

From that moment until February 1917, the Peter and Paul Fortress served as one of the main places of detention for persons who committed illegal acts against the state structure in the Russian Empire. ^[2]

Having received this status, measures were to be organized in the Peter and Paul Fortress for the protection and escort of persons held in it. Our task is to use historical sources to study the features of this organization and their changes depending on the historical period.

Recommendations to its employees on compliance with security measures when escorting prisoners can be found as early as 1790, when the writer Radishchev, who was quite well-known to reading citizens, was kept in it. When he was escorted out of the cell for interrogation, the escort was advised to observe every precaution that should be taken with such an important prisoner.^[3]

In 1825, after the Decembrist uprising, information appeared on the Senate Square about the differentiation of the conditions of detention of persons imprisoned in the Peter and Paul Fortress.

The conditions of detention of prisoners were defined as follows: to keep well; to keep strictly, but well; to keep under strict arrest; to observe strictly; to keep the most. ^[4]

The peculiarities of the detention in the cells of the Peter and Paul Fortress can be seen from the memories of the persons held there during the specified period. For example, chamber No. 1 of the Alekseevsky Ravelin had six steps in length and four in width. The walls have not dried out yet after the recent flood. The windows were painted over and protected by a thick iron grate.^[5]

Some prisoners were shackled, which can be considered a means of restricting mobility at that time. The shackles could be hand or foot shackles. ^[5]

As a rule, shackles were used during the movement of prisoners, worn on their hands and feet, so that movement was slow and this method of escorting was most often used for persons sentenced to hard labor. ^{[8, p. 119]}

The regime of detention in the Peter and Paul Fortress was provided by the guards, who had to constantly monitor every movement of the prisoners. Small glazed slits were made in the cell doors, fenced from the inside with iron bars, and covered with green curtains from the side of the prison corridor.

Thick mats were laid in the corridors to hide the footsteps of the guards. The fortress guards had to move silently and imperceptibly control the behavior of the prisoners. In some cells, depending on the characteristics of the prisoner, additional posts were set up. ^[5]

The prisoners were guarded by specially selected guards who did not have the right to leave the fortress in their free time. The prisoners in the fortress were named by the numbers of the cells where they were kept and taken out for walks one at a time.

To summon a prisoner for interrogation, a guard officer was sent to the fortress with a paper about calling the number of so-and-so. The messenger stopped at a strictly designated place and handed the paper to the head of the team directly guarding the prisoners.

The person being called for interrogation, in his cell, was put on a black hood on his head and led to an interrogation, in the room for the production of which this bandage was removed. ^[5]

In order to comply with the interests of the investigation in the first half of the 19th century, the detention of prisoners was in the nature of solitary cells, that is, they were strictly isolated from each other. ^[5]

Part of the maintenance of the regime were walks, which consisted in taking the prisoner out into the corridor, where he breathed fresh air for several minutes.^[8]

The guards of the Peter and Paul Fortress were forbidden to engage in conversations with prisoners. However, despite the prohibitions, in the first half of the 19th century, from the memoirs of prisoners, it can be concluded that there were violations of duty by the fortress guard unit.

Thus, one of the prisoners testifies to the case when the sergeant-major, unnoticed by other soldiers, drew his attention to some object placed under the mattress of the prison bed. When the guards left the cell, the prisoner found a note from relatives. With the help of the same representative of the fortress guard, correspondence with friends was established. Another prisoner managed to send a note to a relative asking her to position public opinion in favor of a group of prisoners in custody at that moment.^[8]

Thus, we see that violations of duty in the protection of detainees have common features with modern violations committed, for example, by employees of our time. Unfortunately, any communication outside places of detention, both in the 19th century and today, is carried out with the help of persons called upon to protect these places.

Another example confirms the assumption made earlier. For example, one of the guards imperceptibly placed two maple leaves in the far corner of the prison cell of a famous political prisoner, where the words of the letter were impaled. After that, an answer was received through the same soldier in the same way. ^{[8, P. 85]}

As in modern times, unfortunately, among the employees who protect and escort persons in custody, there were people who were ready to betray the interests of the service. So one of the political prisoners was offered a detailed escape plan with the help of the captain of a foreign merchant ship. ^{[8, p. 119]}

In this regard, which is quite natural, the leadership of the fortress and the country constantly applied measures to strengthen the fortress garrison, and accordingly, to the quality of security and escort service.

In the period 1829-1861, even the method of delivery to the Peter and Paul Fortress can be considered one of the security measures. The prisoner's stay in it could become a secret not only for his family, but also for himself. After all, he was taken there by a roundabout and deliberately confusing route in a tightly closed carriage.

A prisoner placed in custody lost his name and was listed only under a number. The system of constant monitoring of prisoners almost eliminated the possibility of establishing communication between them. The guard soldiers were forbidden to enter the cells individually. ^[12] Day and night, two sentries with drawn sabers moved through the corridors.

To supervise the prisoners, in 1873, the commandant of the Peter and Paul Fortress compiled a special instruction for the caretaker. In particular, it categorically prescribes keeping the keys to the cells with you, allowing guards to enter the prisoners only in your presence, paying attention to the strength of the bars, and setting separate guards at each cell. ^[13]

Special attention was paid to the morality of the lower ranks, which indicates that supervision was carried out not only for prisoners, but also for the very protection of this place of detention, in order to exclude the possibility of betrayal of the interests of the service.

Despite the rather strict security measures, some prisoners still managed to persuade representatives of the security and convoy service of the second half of the 19th century to fulfill their requests. In 1882, by receiving information from one of the prisoners, it was revealed that the guards had switched sides with the prisoner in order to prepare an escape. The entire team of the Peter and Paul Fortress was arrested – 69 people with the wording "for the inaction of the authorities." ^[13]

However, when organizing the protection and escort of the Peter and Paul Fortress, there were also achievements in the form of employees of this service, who carried it with honor. This is how one of the famous prisoners of that time describes these dedicated people: he was a real watchdog, he served not for fear, but for conscience and was ready to go in his profession to the end. ^[14] As modern law enforcement officers know, a comparison with a dog in their work is equivalent to a high assessment of professional qualities.

However, not all employees had such a professional approach to the assigned task. Some of them were unable to raise their children properly and the latter, succumbing to false feelings of camaraderie, let their parents down, taking advantage of their proximity to them on official matters.

To understand the issue, let us explain that the caretakers of the Peter and Paul Fortress lived with their families, and one of the caretaker's sons connected some prisoners of the criminal community with other members of it who remained at large at that time. This young man carried it out in the following way. He took books from the prison library and went with them to the city to the apartment of one of the representatives of this criminal group, and he made encrypted notes between the lines, after which the book returned back to the library, and from there to the cells. ^{[15, p. 185]}

The cameras in the Peter and Paul Fortress should be noted separately, since they carry a special characteristic of service in the Peter and Paul Fortress of that time. Each of the heavy oak doors of the cell had two openings: a window through which food was served to the prisoner, and a small glazed slot – a "peephole" for unobtrusive observation of the prisoner. ^{[15, p. 185]}

In the memoirs of one of the prisoners, dated 1882, one can see an element of inspection measures that take place even today when suspects and accused are placed in custody in pre-trial detention facilities. This is how this procedure was described at the end of the 19th century. When the prisoner entered the premises of the fortress, he was surrounded by the fortress security staff. He was asked to undress, and when he undressed completely, he sat down on the offered chair, after which his hair, armpits, between his toes, in his mouth were checked, and after that they provided him with a change of clothes. As the prisoners themselves noted, the thoroughness of the search exceeded the most ardent imagination. ^{[16, pp. 24, 25, 27]}

The security system in the Peter and Paul Fortress cannot but arouse interest. After the events described above in this article with the betrayal of the interests of the service by the soldiers of the guard, by the 1890s a fairly professional security system was developed. Three types of service were used for protection and escort: gendarmes, prison guards, and sentry soldiers. All the services were watching each other in parallel. The shifts were planned so that gendarmes and jurors were on duty in various combinations, randomly. The two of them entered the cell, observing not only what was contained in it, but also each other. When the prisoner was taken out for a walk, he was under the supervision of a gendarme, a warden, two sentries, while the windows of the caretaker of the fortress were always directed to the courtyard for a walk. ^{[16, pp. 24, 25, 27]}

Around this period, several facts of suicide of prisoners can be noted, which led to an increase in security measures on the part of the fortress management. Prisoners were forbidden to have stabbing and cutting objects, and a towel was taken away at night so that the prisoner would not hang himself. In the bathhouse, the prisoner was not allowed to hot water, so as not to be scalded to death. Glassware was not allowed – only wooden spoons. ^{[16, pp. 24, 25, 27]}

However, any strengthening of security measures is always met with an urgent desire of detainees of all times and peoples to circumvent them. If all dangerous objects were excluded from everyday use, then the prisoners concentrated their attention on communication between the cells. One of the methods was as follows: one of the prisoners took a book from the prison library and lettered messages to fellow inmates on the book pages. And other prisoners used tapping on the walls between the cells, invented by the Decembrists, for communication. ^{[17, pp. 149-150]}

The prisoners achieved a certain skill in tapping that they could notify each other about what was asked of them during interrogations. This violated all the tactical methods of conducting the investigation and, in order to prevent tapping, the prisoners were placed so that there was an empty cell between them and a water pipe was still opened in it, muffling the sounds. Gendarmes could also be put in such a cell so that they would knock on the basin with a log, also muffling the tapping. ^{[18, p. 114]}

From 1906 to 1917, the Peter and Paul Fortress was used to detain military prisoners. For example, a general who treacherously surrendered a settlement to the enemy army during the Russian-Japanese war or, later, in 1916, the Minister of War, accused of bribery and treason, was placed in it. The peculiarities of the service for the protection and escort of such prisoners no longer had anything in common with those who were previously held.

Summing up, it should be noted that both during the formation of the Peter and Paul Fortress as a place of detention, and nowadays, the problem of violation of the rules of duty during protection and escort remains relevant. ^[19]

Every modern employee of the security and convoy service of our time should remember that any tricks of persons in custody will be stopped if you are brave, vigilant and resolute. ^[20]

In this regard, it is important to conduct classes and trainings based, among other things, on the experience of previous generations of security and convoy units, since the tricks of persons in custody may be repeated over time, taking into account the development of new technologies.