ideal, there were just a few culture-educational institutions for local population;
education was available for less than a half a towns’ population, so, in general, the
situation in the sphere of culture was not satisfactory, charity was sponsored on the
remaining principle. However, the problems in the southern Ukrainian provinces did
not look as acute as in other regions.
For example, in Podolska province in 1911 there were the least of city’s doctors
– 2 in 35. According to the official calculations 1 (one) doctor referred to 7 842 patients
– of those who applied for medical help only. In fact, the diseased were a lot more.
Over 1 thousand legal proceedings were fixed for a breach of sanitary-hygienic
regulations from which nearly 900 were satisfied. The surpassing number of hospitals
belonged to the State and the zemstvos which were less subordinate to self-government
[18]. On the territory of Volyn province the situation was much worse, because
municipal self-government was almost incapable of rendering medical help. Even in
the second half of XIX – the beginning of XX c. from budgets to the sphere of medicine
less than 1 (one) thousand rubles were allotted, not to mention the years when only 60–
90 rubles were spent on medical needs [24].
Municipalities of Chernigov and Poltava provinces dealt with social and living
conditions problems. Sums of money were annually allotted to supporting the diseased,
the disabled; hospices, canteens and other charitable measures were organized, but
regretfully only in the amount of 600–1200 rubles, which was, in fact, quite inadequate
[8; 29].
In Kursk Province there were 15 towns’ doctors, in Kovensk province – 38
doctors [13]. In Pskov province towns’ doctors were considerably less than the
zemstvo‘s doctors. 123 doctors worked in 161 zemstvo medical workers, whereas 37
in 77 were regarded as zemstvos’ doctors [19; 20].
Municipalities carried out modernization of engineering-technical infrastructure
entirely individually; they did not share their experience. However, without financial
participation of the State, banking institutions and local enterprisers they were not capable
of implementing innovations. Not all cities of the south of Ukraine carried out engineering
modernization. The self-government in Tavria province was the most active where those
problems were clearly understood in the majority of the towns, because it was a social must
for them. In municipalities of Kherson province a modernization trend was spread in
administrative and in some provincial centers, for example in Elisavetgrad. Odessa was a
model city. In towns of Katherinoslav province the most of population even did not think
about those problems, except for Katherrinoslav and Oleksandrovsk.
Municipal town improvement in Podolska province was carried out through
pavements in streets by 80%. However, it was done not due to maximum efforts of
municipal self-government; the reason was that the towns existed since a long time.
- 989 -