Stefan Stambolov and "stambolovists" in the opposition to the Government of Konstantin Stoilov (1894-1895)

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Annotation

Stefan Stambolov and "stambolovists" in the opposition to the Government of Konstantin Stoilov (1894-1895)

Mykolenko D.V.

The article investigates the activities of the famous Bulgarian statesman S. Stambolov and People's Liberal Party in the early years of "narodniak" government headed by K. Stoilov. The crisis of "stambolovists" organization during this period was caused by the lack of finances, the death of the leader in July 1895 and the fact that a lot of its members had left. They adjusted their position in accordance to the actual state's problems and a number of other circumstances.

Key words: Stambolov, the People's Liberal Party, Bulgaria, "stambolovists", Stoilov.

Стефан Стамболов і "стамболовісти" в опозиції до Уряду Константіна Стоілова (1894-1895 рр.)

Content

The last third of the nineteenth century is regarded as a state building period in Bulgaria. A rather prominent political figure of this period - Stefan Stambolov - had a significant role in this process. He was actively involved in the national liberation struggle against the Turkish government during 1870-1878. After the creation of the independent Bulgarian principality he was repeatedly elected as a deputy of the National Assembly, was a member of the Liberal Party and during 1884-1886 occupied the position of the Chairman of Ordinary People's Assembly (hereinafter - OPA).

As a politician Stambolov appeared in 1886. That was the time of coup d'etat in the country organized by pro-Russian officers of the Bulgarian Army, aimed to establish the relations with St. Petersburg. This intention would be realized if the Prince Alexander I, who was in opposition to the Russian Emperor, was removed from the power. Stambolov didn't support the conspirators and headed the counter-revolution to restore the legitimately elected monarch. After he had won this confrontation, he headed the Regency council during 1886-1887 - a body formed after the abdication of Battenberg. In this position Stambolov lobbied the occupation of the Bulgarian throne by German Prince Ferdinand of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, facilitated to limit the influence of Russia on Bulgarian internal affairs. The latter caused the breakdown of the bilateral diplomatic relations with St. Petersburg in 1886.

Stefan Stambolov headed the government in 1887. Occupying this position, he contributed to the establishment the relations between Sophia, Britain and Austria- Hungary, got considerable concessions from the Ottoman Empire to resolve the Macedonian question in a favor of Sofia. The internal politics of Prime Minister was targeted at strengthening the monarchy, developing the industrial production, building the urban infrastructure, extending the ways of communication, and increasing the combat capability of the army and effectiveness of the bureaucracy.

Implementing the program the statesman used the authoritarian methods. Opposition almost suspended its operations under the pressure of the government. The parliamentary majority was created in an undemocratic ways: voters had been forced to cast their ballots for candidates from the People's Liberal "stambolovists" Party (PLP) under the influence of the police and administrative apparatus.

The confrontation between the prince, who had significantly strengthened its position, and the Prime Minister in Bulgaria was actualized in 1893. The outcome was predetermined by the crucial fact that the majority of the army officers had supported the monarch. This support finally facilitated Ferdinand to take advantage of his constitutional rights and force Stambolov to resign the position of Chairman of the Council of Ministers. The former prime minister and regent went over to the opposition to the new government.

The first "stambolovist" government operation (1887-1894) is quite extensively represented in historiography. Bulgarian scientists have studied various aspects of the government [8; 10; 13]. There are also many works devoted to the policies of S. Stambolov followers - representatives of the PLP, which were governing the country as a part of the one-party cabinet during the period 1903-1908 and as a part of the ruling coalition in 1899 and 1913-1918 [14; 19]. Scientists have been also interested in "stambolovist" in an opposition during 1908-1913 and 1918-1920 periods [20; 21]. But the activity of the PLP during the reign of the People's Party headed by Konstantin Stoilov is still insufficiently investigated.

The purpose of this article is to highlight the political practices of the opposition People's Liberal Party in 1894-1895. During this time Stefan Stambolov was still the leader of "stambolovists". He served the functions of the chief until his tragic death on the 18^th of July, 1895.

After the "stambolovists" government had been resigned Ferdinand decided to accord the prime minister's responsibilities to Grekov - the head of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Religions in the cabinet of S. Stambolov. According to the prince guidance the new Council of Ministers had to include representatives of the united opposition. However, "radoslavovists", "zyednists" and the former conservatives banned the appointment of Grekov as the representative of the previous government. Member of the National Liberal Party also refused to support his candidacy, considering that only the leader of their political party was worth to lead the executive branch. This situation facilitated Ferdinand to entrust the formation of the government to the oppositionist K. Stoilov on the 31 of May 1894.

Russophile groups, even those who had not considered getting the ministerial portfolios, enthusiastically met this decision. D. Tsankov had great expectations about changes that had taken place in Bulgaria. On the 11^th of August he published the appeal to the Cabinet of S. Stoilov in the Journal "Петербургские ведомости" encouraging to restore constitutional rights and freedoms, regenerate the relations with Russia, limit defence budget and support local artisans and manufacturers [4, л. 22].

The new government was a coalition. It consisted of representatives of various political groups. K. Stoilov (Prime Minister, Minister of the Interior) and G. Nachovich (Minister of Foreign Affairs and Religion, public works, roads and transport) were the former conservatives, V. Radoslavov (Minister of Education and Justice) and D. Tonchev (Minister of Trade and Agriculture) represented the Liberal Party - the most powerful pro-government force at that time, I. Heshov (Minister of Finance) was the south Bulgarian "zyednist" and Petrov (War Minister) was unaffiliated. It resulted in serious contradictions between the authorities regarding the basic principles of internal and foreign policy. This was especially true for relationship between K. Stoilov and V. Radoslavov.

On the 15^th of August, 1894 Ferdinand issued a decree dissolving the parliament and appointed re-elections of the VIII OPA. The action was caused by practical necessity. The current government didn't have the majority in the legislature, where "stambolovists" remained the largest faction and made it impossible to implement by the new cabinet its own policies.

Thus, during the premiership of K. Stoilov the tradition of political practice established by S. Stambolov in his time was remained. The Cabinet of Ministers was not formed with parliamentary factions that had been elected according to the elections, but on the contrary, the government were doing everything to ensure a parliamentary majority, previously dissolving the National Assembly.

On the eve of the campaign the authorities in their communications with the citizens stressed that K. Stoilov as the Minister of the Interior "introduced a full unrestricted freedom of the people to choose everyone who deserves " [3, л. 2, 4-5]. In practice, however, everything was different. Despite the fact that the most powerful opposition force - PLP decided to ignore elections, as noted above, the process of voting held on the 22nd of September, 1894 was organized under the supervision of Interior ministry. The well-known Bulgarian writer, lawyer and social activist A. Konstantinov described it eloquently in his article "On "elections" in Svishtov" [12]. The use of administrative resources and bribery of voters was the usual set of techniques used by loyal groups to government that was resulted in getting the majority in the OPA.

First of all, the newly formed Council of Ministers resorted to measures that were directed at localization of social and political activities of S. Stambolov and his closest associates. The former Prime was actually under house arrest. Some of the "stambolovists" officials were removed from their responsibilities as a result of denunciations, that is confirmed by correspondence between government officials and local authorities [2, л. 5-6]; some of them lost the job after the investigation of the specially formed parliamentary commission and their charges of abuse of power, corruption and abuse of official position for personal gain [7, c. 22]. There were other facts. For example, the letter sent by "radoslavovist" K. Dobrev to his party chief, proved the dismissal of school teachers who had signed the appeal to the prince asking him not to dissolve the S. Stambolov government [1, c. 9-10].

There was also a tendency of voluntary abandon of the PLP by officials, officers, employees of law enforcement agencies, who tried to change their party affiliation. But the most significant losses of the politics were connected with its sponsors - the main suppliers of funding. For example, D. Papazov and D. Stoyanov joined the "radoslavovist" [18, c. 71]. However, the core of the party remained unchanged. Nevertheless its ideas were supported by wealthy businessmen, such as traders: S. Kyuvliyev, A. Boyadzhyyev, P. Popovich from Sliven and H. Nikiforov from Lovech; industrialists: V. Karahozov, G. Popov, P. Semov, A. Momerin, S. Momerin from Gabrovo; bankers: Ivanitsa brothers and Stefan Simeonov from Ruse and G. Prodanov and R. Mutafov from Dobrich, other associates [18, c. 72].

Despite harassments and artificially created interference by the current government, People's Liberal Party continued to fight for the return to power. In the spring of 1895 its first statute was developed and adopted with the participation of S. Stambolov, and by the middle of the year together with associates he managed to reorganize and resume the work of local cells in Pleven, Chirpani, Lyaskovets, Balls, Burgas, Varna, Kyustendil that actually stopped their functioning from the summer 1894 [18, c. 74]. Constantly feeling the supervision of the authorities he could find the opportunity to communicate with peers, plan joint activities, and give guidance and advice.

Being in opposition, "stambolovists" had limited financial resources for full political activities - campaigning, advocacy and more. This is proved by the appeal of edition "Свобода" to the members and associates of PLP requesting material support for publishing newspapers [15, c. 12], which was deprived of state funding. Voluntary receipts helped to overcome these difficulties and enable to publish three times a week the edition of "Свобода", severely criticizing the internal and foreign policy of K. Stoilov cabinet.

On the 24^th of October, 1894 in the speech to Bulgarian parliament deputies Prime Minister made it clear that the government would make everything to restore the diplomatic relations with Russia. "Stambolovists" sceptically faced such intentions, believing that K. Stoilov and Minister of Foreign Affairs and religions G. Nachovich who had never enjoyed the confidence of St. Petersburg, couldn't not afford to implement the plans [22, 16 ноември]. "Liberator will not deal with Sophia until the Prince Ferdinand remains the Bulgarian throne" [22, 9] - PLP newspaper summarized. At the same time, "Свобода" tried to refute the widespread pro-government press statement that the dismissal of S. Stambolov was the main requirement that Saint Petersburg had advocated to Bulgaria [22, 15].

The position of the People's Liberal Party supporters on the issue of restoring relations with Russia depended on short-term considerations of its leadership. The efforts of S. Stambolov during his premiership to make debugging relationships with St. Petersburg as well as full international recognition of Prince Ferdinand were unsuccessful. So the successful resolution of these issues by the new government could strengthen its reputation and affect the popularity of PLP among citizens. In addition, the Russian government really considered S. Stambolov as one of the main obstacles to establishing the diplomatic relationships between the states. Denying this truth by "stambolovist" was nothing more than a refusal to put up with actual facts that discredited them in the public opinion.

Discussing the mentioned topic on the pages of newspaper "Свобода" S. Stambolov and associates pointed out the threat that loomed over Bulgaria after pro-Russian forces had arrived: "The change of government in the Principality will be accepted by St. Petersburg as a call to action that in turn can have fatal consequences for Sofia. Bulgarians once again find themselves in danger to be enslaved by the Empire as a repetition of other nations fate" [22, 9 ноември]. Journalists reported that representatives of Russophile flow lacked the foresight believing in the idol of the country who didn't not want anything else other than suppression of sovereign states freedom [22, 30 септември]. Constantly putting these arguments, PLP expected to unite patriotic citizens - those who had supported countercoup in 1886 and opposed the obsessive care of Russia.

Another reason for opposition criticism of the government appeared in the late 1894, when the Cabinet of Ministers passed the law requiring the amnesty of emigrants including politicians and former military personnel, capable, according to the official ruling majority of Bulgaria, to facilitate the dialogue between Sophia and St. Petersburg [4, л. 5]. "Свобода" in response published an array of articles which condemned such actions because the participants of Russophile coup in 1886 and several rebellions against legitimate Bulgarian authorities with their campaigns had already put the homeland into the danger of destruction, associating themselves with state criminals. Therefore, the return of immigrants, according to proponents of previous prime minister could provoke new internal cataclysms in Bulgaria [22, 2 декември].

Concentrating their efforts on the restoration of diplomatic relations with Russia, Bulgarian authorities paid less attention to other issues of foreign policy that resulted in other batch of opposition criticism. According to the "stambolovist" opinion the government of K. Stoilov ought to actualise the campaigns of national ideas and try to negotiate with the Porte concerning self-empowerment of Orthodox Slavic population of European Turkish wilayahs. "During the first months of his reign - reported "Свобода" - Stoilov and Nachovich were awarded with orders from Constantinople. So they are constrained by these honours and cannot prevent the transformation of Skopje into the centre of Serbian propaganda" [22, 22 ноември]. The fact that Turkey had turned away from Sofia and started openly to support the Serbs and Greeks in Macedonia and Thrace according to "stambolovists" was a consequence of the pro-Russian policy of the council of ministers [22, 20].

The deterioration of relations with the Ottoman Empire were likely caused by another reason and PLP members tried to attract the attention of masses using the same "Свобода": "Currently Porta refuses to comply with promise, that was given to Stambolov, to expand the network of Bulgarian speaking schools in Macedonia because Constantinople doesn't believe Stoilov as strong personality, which is no doubt the previous prime minister" [22, 22]. "Because of that, - the publications pointed - education institutions subordinated Exarchate stop working in villages around Skopje, and instead Serbian speaking schools open. This practice is contrary to the agreements between Abdul-Hamid II and S. Stambolov. There is an evidence of national interests betrayal by the current Bulgarian government, which remains indifferent and inert" [22, 21].

The position of government of K. Stoilov concerning national liberation movement in Macedonia and Thrace suffered from the criticism of "stambolovist" too. It is known, that the Council of Ministers, headed by S. Stambolov, prohibited any revolutionary committees activities on the territory of the Principality, established by settlers from abroad, preferring peaceful regulation of the issue through negotiations with Porte. The appearance of K. Stoilov changed the situation. It triggered the process of forming in Bulgaria the radical opposed to the Ottoman Empire cells of emigrants from Macedonia and Thrace, whose purpose was to obtain using a revolutionary way the autonomy for their territories within Turkey with the assistance of Sophia and St. Petersburg. Each issue of "Свобода" contained articles with very negative context regarded both the existence of these organizations and their methods of struggle and the connivance of the government: "So far they have been raising money and seeking to draw public attention of Europe to the fate of Christian population; but of course Constantinople is aware of that and has increasingly frustrated, refusing to fulfil the demands of Sofia. The government policy that allows activities of such committees is unpromising affair. It results in appearance of empty declarations again" [23, 19]. Further, the authors of publications emphasized that these centers couldn't be characterized as cohesive, they did not have capable leaders, that's why according to the forecasts of different correspondents this movement wouldn't be widespread and wouldn't have reached its objectives [23, 29].

The attitude of "stambolovist" regarding the expectations of the government of K. Stoilov and representatives of immigrant communities for liberation of Macedonia and Thrace with the assistance of Russia was skeptical. The proofs of groundlessness of these expectations were the historical unforgotten facts which showed unwillingness of St. Petersburg to violate the Berlin status quo: "The liberator rather negatively perceived the union of Principality and Eastern Rumelia; it had never supported the appointment of Bulgarian bishops in European wilayahs of the Ottoman Empire. So, it is enough to wait for its assistance in resolving Macedonian and Thracian questions in a favour of Sofia and, especially, from local Christian population" [23, 19].

The opposition offered its own proven strategy of the problem's solution - to demonstrate the loyalty to Turkey, and transform the process of Macedonia and Thrace liberation into the diplomatic negotiations between states [23, 19]. "During the reign of Stambolov Porta was sure that the Principality under no circumstances would threaten its security. The current government facilitate the formation of revolutionary committees on Bulgarian territory, thus irritates the Turkish government. So it appears unlikely that Constantinople will incorporate the interests of Sophia and its fellows living in Macedonia and Thrace" [23, 27] - noted in the article of the newspaper "Свобода".

The period, when the proponents of S. Stambolov were in opposition, coincided with the aggravation of the so-called "Armenian question". Massacres of civilians that resulted in about 3 thousand of victims were reaction of Ports on protests of local Armenians against paying excessive taxes. These events attracted the attention of the European community. Putting the pressure on the Ottoman Empire, the great powers forced it to begin the investigation of the offense in consideration to complete this plan and promote the project of reforms for further implementation. In the early 1895 the discussion began in the Turkish city of Mush in the presence of European observers and lasted until May. During this period PLP leaders urged the Bulgarian authorities to take advantage of the situation and achieve the inclusion of the Macedonian and Thracian questions in the agenda to the Commission: "If Turkey due to the insistence of Europe compromise in Armenia there is no obstacle to fulfill changes in Macedonia and Thrace, because they are provided by Treaty of Berlin. Ignoring this situation by the government is a crime that sooner or later will result in a pay" [22, 29].

Except the criticism of the foreign policy, realized by the cabinet of K. Stoilov, NLP demonstrated its opposition to the government internal policy. The newspaper "Свобода" published series of articles revealing the intention of K. Stoilov and Prince Ferdinand to limit the constitutional rights. It was the attempt to discredit the Council of Ministers among the civilian population. In the "stambolovists'" opinion the increasing authoritarian tendencies had to be held with the support of the Minister of War Col. R. Petrov, who was called by the opposition "obedient toy in the hands of the monarch" [22, 23]. The task of the army was to neutralize possible protests against the government. The journalists of the edition also expressed the confidence that the current government couldn't not effectively manage the state so S. Stambolov would replace the Prime Minister K. Stoilov [22, 15 ноември].

PLP members reacted negatively to dissolve of the VII OPA that consisted primarily of their representatives. S. Stambolov characterised the action as illegal and pointed that was a direct violation of the Constitution [23, c. 485]. "Stambolovistsx" in protest ignored the next parliamentary elections on the 11^th of September, 1894. It gave "radoslavovist" and south-bell "zyednist" the possibility to form the pro-government parliamentary majority with no significant barriers.

During the second half of 1894 the discussion between proponents and opposition of the government on the economic policy started. On the 2nd of July the Minister of Finance I. Heshov prepared a report on the situation in the public sector to the Premiere Minister. It contained both the required information and proposals to reduce public expenditures, amending the Law of Patents, reforming tax system and increasing excise tax on alcohol. Most of the problems in the economy I. Heshov addressed to failures of the previous government. The response from the opposition to the statement of the Minister of Finance was quite natural - PLP, in turn, accused the government of incompetence and demanded its immediate resignation.

Thus, during the second half of 1894 - early 1895 "stambolovists" represented the most powerful opposition force in the country that actively used to counter their own views to opponents, acted contrary to their opinion, put forward alternative solutions of certain problems, constantly and strongly criticized the government for its foreign and internal policy. PLP was provided by immeasurable support of the newspaper "Freedom" that was doing advocacy work for a long time. German journalist R. Mach characterized publications, aimed at discrediting the government of K. Stoilov: "...often justified, but formally went beyond acceptable" [17, c. 347]. stambolov political activity bulgaria

S. Stambolov had never lost the hope to regain the public office. He had time to reflect on the experience, analyze their activities and recharge with new ideas. In the spring of 1895 instead of D. Petkov the party fellows elected him to the Chairman of the Central Office of the People's Liberal Party [25, c. 30]. It means that he had never left the intention to move away from politics, but rather prepared to continue the struggle. However, the plans did not come true and the obstacle was the attempted murder, committed on the 15^th of July, which resulted in incompatible with a life injuries. The organizer of the crime was the well-known terrorist and the arms dealer N. Tyufekchiyev and the direct executors were such revolutionaries:

M. Atsov, B. Georgiev, M. Stavryev, A. Tsvyetanov. The last two mentioned murders fled the crime scene and even left the country, others, including N. Tyufekchiyev were arrested. Seriously injured S. Stambolov died three days later - on the 18^th of July, 1895 [11, c. 75].

Immediately after the tragedy the Prince Ferdinand and the Prime Minister K. Stoilov declared an unpolitical nature of the murder, saying that the motive of terrible atrocities was the revenge for the death of Major K. Panitsi, executed during the premiership of S. Stambolov. Members of the PLP had the opposite view. They repeatedly appealed to Western journalists to publish in the European press the facts that eloquently proved the involvement in the crime of opponents of the former Chairman of the Council of Ministers [15, c. 146]. German newspaper correspondents of "Kolnische Zeitung" and "Frankfurter Zeitung" and the English "Times" were interested in the information provided.

In the autumn of 1894 the Cabinet of K. Stoilov authorized the return of N. Tyufekchiyev terrorists group to Sofia involved in the assassination of S. Stambolov. The Ottoman Empire was rejected in extradition of its organizer by Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Religions, who was condemned to fifteen years in prison by the Turkish authorities for preparation and murder of diplomatic envoy G. Vylkovich in 1892 and was wanted in this regard. In addition, before the fatal event S. Stambolov had tried to execute documents for travel to Austria-Hungary to treat the diabetes, but the migration service made everything to inhibit the exit. The correspondence between him and German newspaper journalist "Kolnishe Zeitung" R. Mach, who informed the new elected leader of PLP Grekov about it on the 19^th of October, 1895, shows that S. Stambolov had been aware of the crime preparation, and the direct executors [5, л. 1-2], so he hurried as soon as possible to leave the country. Direct evidences of any involvement of government officials in the bloody crime have not been found till our days. The saved letter of prisoner N. Tyufekchiyev to Minister of Foreign Affairs and Religions G. Nachovich proves that he urged with his dismissal, appealing to a well done job [9, c. 178]. There is another letter to Prime Minister K. Stoilov in early 1896 that proves the request of N. Tyufekchiyev to send him money - 10 thousand Lions [27, л. 1-3]. So it is concluded that some people in their activities didn't neglect even terrorist's services to save high positions.

All above mentioned prove - the authorities were aware of the organization of assassination, furthermore some of the representatives of the current government and personally Prince Ferdinand could be customers of murder. The same version was supported by the vast majority of the PLP [6, c. 19]. In this case the motive was a desire of the monarch to eliminate the most influential Bulgarian politician that could hinder his political ambitions, and the desire of some senior officials to deal with Saxe-Coburg and neutralize the opposition leader on the eve of important political act - on the 16^th of July, 1895 after Ferdinand and the Bulgarian delegation had finally got the consent of the Russian Emperor (Nicholas II) to have the audience; he had to go to St. Petersburg to contribute a long-awaited recognition during these visit.

The trial for murder of S. Stambolov headed by G. Pasarov started in December 1896. According to the judgment of the 13^th of February, 1897 N. Tyufekchiyev and M. Atsov were sentenced to three years in prison and B. Georgiev was acquitted [15, c. 439-462]. M. Stavryev and A. Tsvyetanov were not sentenced at all, because according to the verdict of the lawyers they were wanted at the time of the investigation [25, c. 13]. On the 24^th of March, 1898 Sofia Court of Appeals acquitted and released from custody the organizer of the crime N. Tyufekchiyev.

S. Stambolov in opposition to the government of K. Stoilov tried to be consistent in his attitude to the Bulgarian foreign policy. As well as during his premiership he believed that the orientation to Western European countries (Great Britain and Austria-Hungary) was the most viable option for Sofia and criticized the current government intentions to start rapprochement with Russia. S. Stambolov perceived sceptically the potential contribution of St. Petersburg to the resolution of Macedonian and Thracian problems. However Russophobian position of the People's Liberal Party should not have been considered as the only principal settings and was chosen by S. Stambolov partially for temporary reasons. This is proved by his attempts to start a dialogue with St. Petersburg regarding the possibility of resumption of diplomatic relations in 1893-1894. Opposition charges of the government's efforts to establish dictatorship in the country were cynical, because the former Prime Minister as well employed the authoritarian methods to pursuit the opposition, violating the Constitution.

Twenty-five years of revolutionary and political activity of S. Stambolov resulted in the evolution of his views concerning the key problems of Bulgaria, such as external orientation of Sofia, public administrative methods, the means of achieving the goals and objectives. The transformation occurred under the influence of various factors. First of all that's a personal experience of politics that gained from the practice. It is the fact that the older S. Stambolov got the more conservative, moderate and prudent he became. After he had got the political Olympus top, the former romantic revolutionary showed unwillingness to selflessness and sacrifice. However, at the time of his participation in the liberation struggle of the Bulgarian people against the Ottoman captivity, and during the period of regency, premiership and in opposition to the cabinet of "narodnyaks" S. Stambolov remained a patriot, always trying to protect the public interests. The evaluation of its initiatives should be made considering the context of the era the politician lived. The second half of the nineteenth century - is the era of nation and nationalism, independent development of South-Eastern Europe, international recognition of them, development of market economy, innovation and new technologies in production. And S. Stambolov as the leader of the country met the requirements and challenges. It is possible to describe the successes and failures of this individual more grounded only considering the consequences of its activities on further political, social and economic development of Bulgaria.

Notes

1. Български исторически архив при Национална библиотека "Св. Св. Кирил и Мефодий". - Ф. 263 "В. Радославов". - Оп. 1. - А. е. 6.

2. Български исторически архив при Национална библиотека "Св. Св. Кирил и Мефодий". - Ф. 263 "В. Радославов". - Оп. 1. - А. е. 15.

3. Български исторически архив при Национална библиотека "Кирил и Мефодий". - Ф. № 263 "Васил Радославов". - Оп. 1. - А. е. 16.

4. Български исторически архив при Национална библиотека "Св. Св. Кирил и Мефодий". - Ф. 11 "Д. Цанков". - Оп. 1. - А. е. 24.

5. Български исторически архив при Национална библиотека "Св. Св. Кирил и Мефодий". - Ф. 290. - "Д. Греков". - Оп. 1. - А. е. 84.

6. Генадиев Н. Реч по одобряване Указа за закриването на Университета и уволняването на преподавателския персонал / Н. Генадиев. - София, 1907. - 50 с.

7. Ератов П. Преди и сега / П. Ератов // Стефан Стамболов като революционер, общественик и държавник: Сборник от статии. - София, 1921. - 116 с.

8. Иванов Д. Стефан Стамболов - българската енергия / Д. Иванов. - София, 1993. - 224 с.

9. Иванов Д. Стефан Стамболов - от перото до ятагана / Д. Иванов. - София, 2005. - 192 с.

10. Коев А. Стефан Стамболов и българската просвета и култура / А. Коев // Известия на Регионален исторически музей. - Велико Търново, 2004. - № 19. - С. 191-197.

11. Кой уби Стамболов: Документални, вестникарски материали и спомени за последната година от живота и убийството на Стефан Стамболов / Съст.: Д. Давчева, Г. Чоланов, С. Овчаров, С. Тонев. - София, 1991. - 79 с.

12. Константинов А. По "изборите" в Свищов [Електронен ресурс]/ А. Константинов. Режим на доступ: http://www.slovo.bg/showwork.php3? AuID=169&WorkID=981 6&Level=1. Доступ - 10. 09. 2014.

13. Косев К. Стефан Стамболов - бележит революционер и държавник / К. Косев // Епохи. - 1994. - № 1. - С. 7-16.

14. Кьосев Х. Второто Стамболовистко правителство и икономическото съперничество между Германия и Австро-Унгария за българския пазар (1903-1908 г.) / Х. Кьосев // Българско-германски отношения и връзки. - София, 1972. - Т. 1. - С. 141-165.

15. Личен архив на Стефан Стамболов: Писма, телеграми, рапорти, записки и днев- ници / Съст.: М. Куманов и др. - София, 2002. - Т. 8. - 848 c.

16. Личен архив на Стефан Стамболов: Писма, телеграми, рапорти, записки и дневници / Съст.: М. Куманов и др. - София, 2002. - Т. 9. - 723 c.

17. Мах Р Спомени / Р Мах // Стефан Стамболов в спомени на съвременници. - София, 2003. - 117 с.

18. Николова В. Към характеристиката на Народнолибералната партия (1894-1903) / В. Николова // Исторически преглед. - 1976. - № 2. - С. 69-81.

19. Попов Ж. Народнолибералната (стамболовистка) партия в България, 1903-1920 / Ж. Попов. - София, 1986. - 200 с.

20. Попов Р Монархическият институт, буржоазните партии и проблема за конститу- ционното управление в България в началото на ХХ в. / Р Попов // Първи международен конгрес по българистика, 1981. - София, 1982. - Т. 1. - С. 463-476.

284 Вісник ХНУ: Серія: Історія... 2015 - Вип. 50

21. Саздов Д. Многопартийната политическа система и монархическият институт в България (1879-1918) / Д. Саздов. - София, 1993. - 355 с.

22. Свобода. - 1894.

23. Свобода. - 1895.

24. Стефан Стамболов: Свобода или смърт / Съст М. Куманов, Д. Иванов. - София, 2003. - 112 с.

25. Танкова В. Проблеми на организационното устройство и развитие на Народноли- бералната партия (1886-1894) / В. Танкова // Векове. - 1988. - № 5. - С. 21-30.

26. Убийството на Стефан Стамболов: наказателно дело № 1103: протокол и при- съда / Ред. Н. Игов. - София, 1995. - 288 с.

27. Централният държавен архив на Республика България. - Ф. 600 к "К. Стоилов". - Оп. 3. - А. е. 132.

Размещено на Allbest.ru