CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION COMMISSION ON THE RUMORS ABOUT POLITICAL DISHONESTY OF R.V.MALINOVSKY1

On the very first day after his arrival abroad, R.V.Malinovsky, having learned about the rumors that appeared in the newspapers in connection with his resignation from the State Duma, immediately appealed to the supporters of the leading institution of the Marxists with a request to investigate his biography and all his activities. The governing institution, after a short time, appointed a commission of inquiry, which worked under the chairmanship of the Polish Marxist Ganetski (the representative of the Polish S.D. at the Second Congress [of the RSDLP] in 1903).

The commission listened to the most important witnesses by means of oral and written communications. From Malinovsky himself it received the most detailed testimony on all questions put to him. In one case the commission arranged a confrontation. Already very soon it became quite clear to the commission that all rumors of Malinowski's provocation were absolutely nonsense. This unanimous conviction of the commission was communicated to the leading institution of the Marxists, which, as is well known, declared in the press that it was absolutely convinced of Malinowski's political honesty2.

The commission continued its work. It soon succeeded in identifying also some of the spreaders of dark rumors concerning Malinowski. In the present brochure the commission considers it its duty to bring to the attention of all workers the main results of its work. Out of the large amount of material collected by the commission, it is forced here to limit itself to the main and essential. The organized workers of Russia will learn all details and particulars by other means of communication - all appropriate measures have been taken to this end.

The present brochure, according to its content, is divided into three parts. In the first part the main data concerning the political biography of Malinovsky are given. In the second part, all significant rumors and suspicions against Malinowski are given and dealt with. And, finally, in the third part, the commission considered it its duty to announce the data that it was able to establish about the groups and persons who spread dark rumors about Malinowski.

1. Malinovsky's resignation from the State Duma

In its work the Commission was interested in Malinovsky's departure from the State Duma insofar as it tried to deduce from the fact of his departure the conclusions testifying to Malinovsky's provocation. The commission did not enter into a political assessment of the motives for leaving. It goes without saying that, as members of the Marxist whole, the members of the commission, together with all Marxist workers, considered the withdrawal in the form in which Malinovsky had carried it out to be a step of criminal disorganization, a step not to be tolerated in the workers' movement. But it was important for the investigating committee to establish precisely the motives for the withdrawal in order to clarify to what extent the inferences from the fact of the withdrawal to the assumption of provocation have ground under their feet.

The commission found that Malinovsky's reasons for leaving the Duma were precisely those stated in the well-known statements of the RSDR faction and the governing institution3. These reasons were: extreme nervousness, mental fatigue, and a painful eclipse. Besides, the commission found that Malinovsky's reckless step was also influenced by one purely personal circumstance, which had nothing to do with politics in general or with the workers' movement in particular. The commission does not consider it possible or necessary to publicize this circumstance in detail. It does not concern Malinovsky alone. Most importantly, we repeat, it has not the slightest relation to political life and the workers' movement.

The very fact of Malinovsky's abandonment of his responsible post, of course, deserves the severest condemnation. But whoever wants to know the real truth about Malinovsky's political honesty or dishonesty has no right to be guided by feelings of natural irritation caused by a disorganizing step. Whoever wants to know the truth must understand the facts and events, carefully check and weigh all of Malinovsky's activities and judge only on the basis of these only serious data. This is what the commission did.

2. Political biography of Malinovsky

The first duty of the commission was to establish in detail the political biography of Malinowski. On the basis of all the data available to the commission, this biography is drawn as follows1*.

R.V. Malinovsky

R.V.Malinovsky's conscious attitude to political activity began only from the time he entered the military service. Before that time he did not have any political convictions. There was only a simple sympathy of a Pole for the PPS as a party fighting against national oppression, but he had never been a member of this party either before or after his military service. He was taken into military service in 1901 in the Life Guards Izmailovsky Regiment. Here, at his request, he was transferred to the rifle shop, where he first met a Russian Social Democrat. He was a soldier, a former machinist at a St. Petersburg factory.

This man made a strong impression on Malinovsky, and from that time he became a revolutionary himself. But in the rifle workshop Malinovsky did not stay long, he was again returned to the regiment, and in April 1904, he is already in the stableboys to Colonel Boterianov. Here Malinovsky got acquainted with his future wife S.A., who served at that time at the company commander Razgildeev, through her and her relatives he also got acquainted with the conscious workers of the Putilov factory and Rechkin's factory. On January 9, 1905 he took part in a demonstration. Soon afterwards he was again transferred to the regiment. Here once, when one of the soldiers scolded the strikers, Malinovsky spoke in their defense.

About this case reported to the company commander Razgildeev, who, as already mentioned, served as Malinovsky's future wife - SA. The company commander suggested Malinovsky, in order not to give the case further progress, to file a report on the voluntary desire to go to war (with Japan). Malinovsky did so. And in the summer of 1905 he found himself already a volunteer in Mogilev province, where he met with some Bundists. In the same summer he was sent to the Far East with the 20th marching battalion, but the conclusion of peace soon brought him back to St. Petersburg.

Here Malinovsky first enters the pipe factory (on the First Company), and after a few days he goes to work in the Langensippen factory (Kamennoostrovsky Prospekt). From this moment his social and political work begins. At this factory the workers who worked with Malinovsky were Ozerov, alias Antonov, Kladovikov and one painter who later worked at the Putilovsky factory. Through these workers Malinovsky enters the working environment of the S.-D.

In the spring of 1906 he took part in the organization of the Union of Metalworkers and became a member of the district board. During the Sveaborg Uprising4 he is already a member of the factory committee of the Bolshevik faction, speaks at rallies (at one of them he takes part in guarding Abram), and participates in S.D. cells. By the fall of 1906 he was already in the Petersburg sub-district committee and took an active part in all local S.-D. work. During the elections to the Second State Duma he kept a party apartment (B.Belozerskaya, 27), where district meetings were held. At the same time Malinovsky was working, among others, with Ozerov, Shevchenko, Myasnikov (a member of the committee), Petrov (from Geisler), Malyshev (iron-rolling plant), Vinogradov (Leontiev's plant).

Simultaneously with party work Malinovsky worked as a delegate and in the Union of Metal Workers. And when on June 2, 1906, all unions were closed in St. Petersburg, the St. Petersburg branch of this union, despite the resolution of the Nevsky, Vasileostrovsky and Vyborgsky districts to cease its activities, continued its work, and in July 1906 Malinovsky was elected to the district board of the semi-legal union. Petrov (Geisler plant), Malyshev (iron rolling plant), Makarychev (Geisler plant), Vinogradov (Leontiev plant) and Ozerov served on this board.

The activities of this department revitalized other areas by the fall, and by November 1906 they were restored. A meeting of all the districts was held at the Forest Institute, and Malinovsky was elected citywide secretary of the union against Tomsky (but not Michael). The following persons were then on the board with changes: From the Narva district - Kasatkin (a Socialist) and Volkov (a liquidator); from the Vasileostrovsky district - Bulkin, Kalinin, Shotman and another Socialist who had fallen in with the bombs at No. 82 Bolshoi Prospect of Vasilievsky Island (he was helped by Malinovsky to escape to America); from the Nevsky district - Bogdanov, Shevchenko and Efimov; Vyborgsky - Volkov (aka "Chechen"), Ershov, Karlovich and Yatsynevich; Gorodsky - Romanov and Lugovoi; Moskovsky - Piskarev; Petersburgsky - Ozerov, Makarychev, Petrov, the lame Plekhanov (a member of the Soviet of Workers' Deputies) and Malinovsky.

At the same time, intellectuals including Tomsky, Sher, Kibrick, Kamermacher, Dmitriev, G. Naumov (Naum Ginzburg), Grinevich, Svyatlovsky, Shary (aka Ryzhov) and Ryazanov worked on the organization of the Central Bureau of the Petersburg Trade Unions. Malinovsky was also a member of the Central Committee, and from February to April 1907 the secretariat of the Central Committee. On May 14, 1907 the Union [of Metalworkers] was legalized, and at the general meeting Malinovsky was elected as a member of the board, and lastly as secretary of the Union, which he was until October 1909. By this time new people were already working in the union: Dementyev, Kanatchikov, and Chirkin. At the same time Malinovsky got acquainted with Meshkovsky, Kamenev, Makar, and Grigory. By the same time he was elected to the first cooperative congress, to the first congress of factory doctors5. He also participated in the congress of national universities, and in 1907-1908 he was elected to the organizing committee for the convention of metal workers. In September, 1909. Malinovsky participated in the meetings convened on the question of strengthening the S.-D. organization.

In November 1909 he was arrested together with Kupriyanova, Dementiev (Kvadrat), Predkalny, Magidov, and [Tomsky], 8 or 9 people in all, at a preliminary meeting of delegates to an anti-alcohol congress6. He remained under arrest until mid-January 1910, when he was released with forfeiture of the right of residence in St. Petersburg. Upon his release, Nikolai [Morskilo], a member of the Union's board, arranged for Malinovsky to vacation in Finland. The Union gives him monetary assistance (about 100 rubles). Workers from the factories collect about 200 rubles more.

Having learned that his comrade Shevchenko, who was exiled like him, settled in Moscow, Malinovsky in the middle of February 1910 goes there and by Easter of this year settles down to work at the factory "Shtole" in Butyrki. On April 4-5, his wife, who had been living in St. Petersburg at the Union all this time, comes to visit him, and they settle behind Butyrskaya Zastava. In the winter, in October or November, 1910. Malinovsky entered the University of Chanyavsky. He attended it only four times. In the spring of 1911, he enrolled as a member of the "Moscow Consumer Society," at the first meeting of which in April he was elected to the audit committee, and the latter to its chairmen. Work in the cooperative absorbed Malinovsky all the time, the society existed for a year and a half, and the audit was not once. In June, the report was approved, and Malinovsky stopped giving all his time to the cooperative shop.

At this time, just at this time Kibrick comes to him with a proposal to go to a meeting of old friends of comrades. This meeting took place, and there were Sher, Kibrick, Yezhov, Chirkin, Malinovsky and another intellectual (not Roman). At this meeting the question of the desirability of convening a meeting of the old comrades who had been dispersed throughout Russia (there is a detailed correspondence about this in "Social-Democrat "7) was clarified. At the first meeting no technical questions were discussed, and only at the second meeting were the roles assigned. At this second meeting, when the question of whom to invite was being decided, it became clear to Malinovsky that this was a purely factional liquidationist venture, and he left the meeting (in the text "we quarreled "8), and so the matter came to nothing.

In the fall of 1911. Malinovsky again enrolled at the University of Shanyavsky, and in February 1912 he left Moscow and went to work in the village of Rostokino at Ferman's factory, where he lived, isolated from all his comrades, until 14-16th2*.

3. The main suspicion against Malinovsky

The main and apparently the first suspicion against Malinovsky arose in Moscow in the first half of 1911. The Commission succeeded in questioning in detail the main witness on this point - the person whom the suspects had instructed to bring the suspicions to the attention of the organized Marxists. The suspects were four young workers: Pletnev, Kozlov, Bronnikov and Bykov. The person with whom these four shared their suspicions and asked to convey them to their comrades was N. I. Bukharin. The latter was heard in detail by the commission.

The suspicions of the four were summarized as follows: 1) in connection with the Second Congress of Factory Doctors9 a delegate from Kharkov was arrested, who had sent a letter to a comrade in Moscow. The letter was about the Congress of Factory Doctors and mentioned the Social-Democratic preparations for the Congress. In the letter, according to the foursome or someone one of the foursome, Malinovsky's name was mentioned. The addressee and the Kharkov delegate, the author of the letter, were arrested, but Malinovsky was not arrested.

2) During one arrest (in the evening) in one of the Moscow unions (near Sukharev Tower) Malinovsky was also arrested. The next morning Malinovsky was taken to the station to receive his wife's belongings. It seemed suspicious to the Quartet how the wife could have learned of the arrest so early.

3) In the winter of 1910 - 1911, several persons were arrested in Moscow who participated in meetings and outings organized by the Moscow liquidators, with whom Malinovsky also met. During interrogations, the gendarmes revealed great knowledge of everything that took place at these meetings and outings. This awareness could, in the opinion of the four, be explained by Malinovsky's provocation. These are the main "accusations" of the four workers mentioned. Let us take a closer look at this primary source of suspicion3*.

In investigating the origin and spreading of rumors about Malinovsky's provocation, the Investigation Commission established the following fact: in the late winter or early spring of 1911, four Moscow workers: Pletnev, Bronnikov, Bykov and Kozlov, sitting in prison, informed their fellow prisoner, Nikolai Ivanovich Bukharin, of their suspicions against Malinovsky for transmission to the local (i.e., Moscow) leading institution of organized Marxists10 . These suspicions were dealt with in substance in the first part of the conclusion of the investigating commission, which could not but recognize them as not withstanding the weakest criticism, as absolutely frivolous.

Only the extreme inexperience and youth of the four workers named could have caused them, even for a moment, to attach importance to such suspicions. However, N. I. Bukharin positively stated in his testimony to the investigating committee that these four workers themselves were hesitating, expressing their suspicions only in a presumptive, not at all categorical form. We must also take into account that in Moscow at that time there was an epidemic of rumors and suspicions of provocation. This epidemic is characterized, for example, by the fact that the Moscow Marxists Odysseus and Arkady, meeting4* , reported to each other mutual suspicions of provocation! Another Marxist, Khimik, made it a condition of work to stop talking about provocation - so serious were these talks.

In any case, N. I. Bukharin carried out the assignment given to him by his comrades in prison and, on his release from prison, passed on his suspicions to Shulyatikov, the former chairman of the investigating commission on provocateur cases at the Moscow executive. Thus the members of the organization fulfilled their party duty by bringing their suspicions to the attention of the responsible official of the collective. If these four workers had fulfilled their party duty in another respect, i.e., had not "conducted private" conversations (simply: had not gossiped), "dark rumors" against Malinovsky could not have arisen and spread.

Shulyatikov, upon learning of the suspicions, immediately pointed out, according to Bukharin's testimony, the epidemic of provocative rumors. The investigating] committee knows that Shulyatikov was as a member of the Extended Editorial Board of Proletarian, a participant in the 1909 Bolshevik Conference abroad, and was in communication with the Bolshevik leadership abroad11. There can be no doubt that he would have reported the suspicions to the leading institution if it had not turned out that they5* were completely nonsense. This is the only thing any adult person could have done.

In the Vologda exile, where the above-mentioned 4 workers went, the spreading of rumors, gossip and slander against Malinovsky has already begun, and the outstanding role in this spreading is played by the intellectuals-liquidators Alexander Ivanovich Vinogradov and Vasily Sher, both Muscovites, and the latter probably knew the 4 workers and enjoyed "ideological" authority in their eyes (the 4 above-mentioned workers, who had been hesitant in Moscow, but were under the influence of V. Sher, in exile became definitively in exile.Sher, in exile finally became liquidators).

Concerning A. I. Vinogradov, the Svednaya Committee has the testimony of two witnesses concerning his participation in the spreading of gossip against Malinovsky. V. Sher in his conversation with N.I.Bukharin in Vienna at the beginning of December 1913 (about this conversation the materials of the Special Committee have, firstly, the original letter Bukharin sent immediately after the conversation to the governing institution, and secondly, Bukharin's detailed additional and verifying personal testimony12) stated quite definitely that "in the Vologda] exile they openly spoke about Malinovsky's unreliability" and that he, Sher, himself wavering between trusting these rumors and being convinced of their complete nonsense, personally dissuaded A. I. Vinogradov from instituting proceedings against Malinovsky.I. Vinogradov from initiating official proceedings against Malinovsky.

This last act of Vassily Sher was on his part a direct violation of Party duty. To dissuade a person who considers himself a Marxist6* from officially initiating a case of provocation (including here an official report to the local or All-Russian institution of the current or faction in which the person in question has confidence) - dissuasion is permissible only under two conditions:

First, if the dissuader himself does not hesitate at all on the question of the seriousness of the suspicion. The slightest hesitation on this point, as any adult person who is not suffering from mental illness or mental impairment knows, will inevitably lead to the fact that one or another of his friends, relatives, neighbors, etc. will learn about the hesitation, i.e. to the spread of gossip and slander; Two, if the dissuader is absolutely convinced that his influence and authority are so strong that the person whom he has dissuaded really recognizes himself as fully and finally convinced and will really be able to fulfill his duty of non-proliferation "privately" of such details that he does not have the courage to communicate directly and on his own behalf to the institution in charge.

Neither condition was knowingly present in the present case. Sher "hesitated" himself and "hesitated" to the point that after Malinovsky's election to the State Duma he wrote him an enthusiastic and welcoming letter, compared him to Bebel, and expected historic deeds from him (all on the condition of his refusal to fight decisively against the liquidators; Sher's letter to Malinovsky is available in the original in the materials of the Svobodstvennaya Komissiya)13. On the other hand, after the formation of the Russian Social-Democratic Workers' Faction, when the liquidators' anger against Malinovsky reached its peak, the same Sher expressed to N.I. Bukharin as "suspicion" of the liquidators.Bukharin, as a "suspicion" against Malinovsky, the belief that the ransacking (probably by thugs) of Malinovsky's Moscow apartment at the end of November, 1913, was a "comrade's search" (i.e., a search of Malinovsky's apartment by comrades who suspected Malinovsky of provocation and sought proof of it).

The merits of this "evidence" against Malinovsky are dealt with in Part 1 of the report of the Special Committee. It is quite obvious that only a person with a morbid imagination or blinded by political enmity8* against Malinovsky could see the "evidence" here.

A. I. Vinogradov, who, according to the statement made by V. Sher to N. I. Bukharin, refused to initiate a case against Malinovsky, i.e., as if he had quite seriously and conscientiously convinced himself of the utter nonsense of rumors and suspicions, continued to spread gossip and slander about Malinovsky after his Vologda exile.

The direct party duty of V. Sher, as the most influential and developed man among the Vologda exiles-liquidators, and a man capable of writing enthusiastic and "friendly" letters to Malinovsky, was to collect (in exact written form) all the "rumors" about Malinovsky that were circulating among V. Sher's acquaintances.Scheer's "rumors" about Malinovsky, to systematize and check them beforehand, to draw up a precise and definite resolution about them, either on behalf of one or another colony of Vologda exiles, or on behalf of one or another of the leading institutions that enjoyed V. Scheer's confidence.

If this direct party duty was not fulfilled either by Sher, or by A. I. Vinogradov, or by any other of the Vologda liquidators (and V. Sher had especially convenient conditions for fulfilling this duty after his departure abroad), this monstrous neglect of party duty, this transformation of an organized Marxist into a spreader of gossip and slander, can only be explained by taking into account the atmosphere of fiercest9* enmity against Malinovsky which developed just in the spring of 1911.

The peculiarity of Malinovsky's political career lies in the fact that he, who had become a Social-Democrat only during his military service in the Izmailovsky regiment, returned from the war only in 1906 (i.e., after the main upsurge of the revolution) and immediately began to work in a trade union, almost exclusively in legal workers' unions. On the one hand, this aroused suspicion among those who did not know his biography and were surprised that Malinowski was less persecuted by the courts and the administration (less in comparison with people who had gone through party work before and in 1905). On the other hand, the "legalist" Malinovsky, who, by virtue of his work in the legal arena, knew perfectly well all the near-heads of liquidationism (apart from Sher), aroused the vague suspicions of some Moscow Bolsheviks, who spoke of Malinovsky's "unreliability" in the sense of so-called "factionalism", i.e., in the sense that Malinovsky was an unreliable Bolshevik, that he was a semi-liquidator.

Such reviews were made. This fact was established by the Slednaya Commissariat. This fact was explained to a considerable extent by the youth and inexperience of a number of Moscow Bolsheviks who could not understand the peculiarity and novelty of the position of the opponent of liquidationism, who worked almost exclusively in the legal movement. It is not difficult to understand what impression could be made in Moscow, in an epidemic of provocative rumors, probably by the young workers-intelligentsia of the Bolshevik milieu, of the assumption of Malinovsky's "unreliability".

In the spring of 1911 there occurred in Russia a most important event in the liquidationist camp, described, among other things, in the foreign press (appendix to No. 2714). Precisely: a number of leaders of liquidationism had the high-praised (from the point of view of the government) idea of recognizing the absence of the party's governing body (i.e., of actually liquidating the party) and, in addition to it, of holding elections to the Fourth State Duma, having themselves selected liquidationist candidates for this purpose!

Cher, Chirkin and Malinovsky, who had not participated in the meetings on this question, knew about them. Malinovsky condemned the liquidators so sharply, mercilessly, frantically, that he had the strongest conflict with the liquidator Chirkin on this ground. Sher, who was on Chirkin's side (despite his nominal "extra-faction"), knew about this conflict. Thanks to Malinovsky's influence among the workers, Malinovsky's recall effectively ended the attempt to "liquidate" the underground. The hatred of the liquidators for Malinovsky knew no bounds after that.

It was only on the basis of this hatred that an atmosphere could have been created in the Vologda exile in which a number of liquidators (Sher and Vinogradov among them), in direct violation of their unconditional Party duty, did not give mere direction to suspicions and suppositions, but fanned them into gossip and slander spread "privately".

The further spreading of gossip and slander was established in St. Petersburg by a circle of liquidationist literati with L. Martov at their head and in Vienna by the "Augustists "10* with Trotsky and Schär at their head15.

In the autumn of 1913, two members of the handbook (of the Truthists) for the first time became aware, thanks to reports from the handbooks of other "currents or factions," of the suspicions arising, apparently on the basis of Vologda rumors and gossip, against Malinovsky. Two members of the governing establishment, who were immediately joined by a third at the first physical opportunity, established by investigation and analysis of the suspicions at once that they were completely unserious and nonsense, and that they were undoubtedly dependent on rumors coming from somewhere16. Therefore, all11* members of the governing institution, who had the opportunity to learn about the case at the same time, adopted12* a resolution: to recognize all suspicions and rumors as obvious nonsense and to keep a close watch on the source of the rumors. The suspicion of two members of the governing body that these rumors were probably spread by the liquidators and that L. Martov could hardly13* stand aside from the spread of slander and dark rumors from the corner14* prompted them to formally oblige 3-4 comrades who knew about the rumors to immediately and accurately inform the governing body of any conversation15* concerning the rumors.

On December 14-16*, 1913, a letter from N. I. Bukharin, written on December 13, 1913 (A.D.), was received by a member of the governing body with an account of his conversation with N. I. Bukharin, which had just taken place on 12.XII. 1913 in Vienna, of his conversation with W. Scherr.

In this letter the following facts were established:

1) V. Scher stated that, in his opinion, the ransacking of Malinovsky's apartment in Moscow was a "comradely search" (see above);

2) V. Sher further stated that "the local upper classes17* knew the story". By history was meant rumors, and by the upper classes Cher could mean only Trotsky and the influential Bundovites and "Augustovites" (prominent, leading members of the Augustov bloc).

3) W. Sher relayed to N. I. Bukharin a conversation with Trotsky (some other people were present) concerning Gamma's (Martov's) article "From Step to Step," which, by the way, said something about the possibility of a more reprehensible "two-handedness" than in the case of Dansky17. "This is a hint at Malinovsky," said Trotsky, resenting Gamma. Sher protested too, and told them that he was aware of the rumors but that they were without foundation; he said he had stated it very sharply. "18*.

4) "In Vologda Province (link) the unreliability of Malinovsky was spoken of quite openly .... Everyone in Moscow knows; it is a secretPolishinel" (Sher's statement to Bukharin; quoted from the same place).

From all this follows:

I. Rumors of Malinovsky's provocation19* were certainly spreading in the Viennese "August" tops, not only between Schär and Trotsky, but also between other persons close to them.

V. Sher was well aware of the widespread (of course, only among the intelligentsia of the liquidationist circles; we have no indication of the participation of the workers in the dissemination) spreading of the rumors in the Vologda exile and Moscow. V. Sher himself (whether because of his "hesitation" or for other reasons) took an impossibly two-faced position, on the one hand, declaring before Trotsky and others that "the rumors are without foundation", and on the other hand, on the very next day, transmitting to Bukharinunov a rumor, especially monstrous and especially ridiculous, namely, that the ransacking of Malinovsky's apartment in Moscow was a "comrade's search". V. Sher, as a Muscovite with many connections in Moscow, both in the intelligentsia and in the bourgeois world, had thousands of opportunities, if he was really convinced that the "rumors were groundless" and if he seriously and sincerely wished to put an end to their spread, to verify his assumption of a "comrade's search". T h e slightest attempt at verification, a copy of the bourgeois newspapers w h i c h reported it, an inquiry w i t h bourgeois correspondents, etc., w o u l d instantly show that, w h i c h one w a s s sane, one must not make nonsense assumptions about a "comrade's search".

The transmission of such a rumor, fabricated by Sher, to N. I. Bukharin, who had every reason to consider Sher a very well-informed person and who naively believed Sher, was entirely of the nature of arousing direct panic on the basis of ridiculous and maliciously slanderous rumors.

II. When Trotsky stated to Sher and others that Gamma (i.e., L. Martov, who was hiding under a new pseudonym) was hinting precisely at Malinovsky's provocation (for Gamma's article referred - about this below - positively to a connection with the guards), Trotsky, in the first place, revealed by this his extreme and complete awareness not only of the rumors known to L. Martov in general, but also of what L. Martov might be hinting at and probably was hinting at. It is not possible to explain such awareness otherwise than by the repeated conversations20* between the "Augustists" and the liquidationist group of literati with L. Martov at their head.

In the second place, deciphering in a close campaign of his close comrades21* the dark and purely anonymous note of Martov (for Martov, hiding under the pseudonym of Gamma, did not, of course, say to what and whose connections with the guards he was alluding), Trotsky played no less, if not more, a two-faced role than V. Sher. For if V. Sher himself, at a meeting with Trotsky and someone else, declared the rumors "without foundation", and a couple of days later passed these rumors on to Bukharin, adding a newly fabricated rumor about a "comrade's search" at Malinovsky's place, this fact sufficiently characterizes the conditions and environment22* under which the rumors were spread23*.

The Party duty was here clearly violated by Trotsky, Sher and the persons who were present with them, for it would have been possible, with a conscientious attitude to the matter, only on condition that such a report should be made by another person, that such a report be made to another responsible, democratic governing body, which will either officially declare, after verification, that the rumors are nonsense, or officially, after verification, recognize them as serious and pass them on to the proper authority. On this point, there have never been two opinions among Democrats who are sincerely striving to combat the terrible evil of provocation and the practice of spreading maliciously slanderous rumors about it. It is worth noting one example: in the spring of 1911, the members of the (London) Bolsheviks, who were in charge of the institution, received a letter about the suspicions of certain persons in prison against one prominent Zekist of another Social Democratic organization24*. This letter, in an appropriate excerpt, was then immediately handed over to a member of the governing body of this organization25* (as well as to members of two other leading organizations)18 26*. It goes without saying that, with this attitude, no "rumors" of provocation by a prominent worker27* could have arisen or spread, and the governing institution of the organization to which the worker belonged28*, together with the groups that trusted him, investigated the suspicions and officially declared them completely unfounded.

The Commission states, on the basis of reports29* from the governing institution of the Truthists, that this institution30* has never received any reports about the rumors about Malinowski either from the governing institutions of the "Augustists", from the liquidationist Duma faction, or from the governing institution of the Bund, although after Trotsky had deciphered Martov's dark and doubly anonymous hints in Vienna in front of intimate friends, neither Trotsky nor his friends could in any case think or hope that they could stop the spread of rumors which had begun to penetrate the press in the dirtiest (dark and doubly anonymous) form.

To suppose that of all Martov's acquaintances and political friends only Trotsky, and only in Vienna, deciphered before "especially close" persons what Martov wanted to say, is quite impossible.

III. The deed of L. Martov, who, under a new pseudonym Gamma, still unknown to anyone, wrote in the "Severnaya Rabochaya Gazeta" in November, 1913, against the "truthers" about the possible entry of someone or someone unknown into relations with the guards (see "Severnaya] Rabochaya Gazeta" No. of November, 1913)19 - this deed cannot give rise to two opinions as to its character.

The Pravdist newspaper remarked about Gamma's feuilleton that it was "hysterical nonsense" and urged the workers to shun such filthy literati of the liquidationist camp (see "Pravdu" No. of 191320).

In reality, however, as can be seen from all the above-mentioned data, this was not hysterical nonsense at all, but a calculated deciphering by Trotsky and others in their "private conversations" of the spread of dirty slander.

The act of L. Martov, who, hiding behind a new pseudonym, under which he did not write either in the liquidationist or in the liberal-bourgeois press, spread through the newspaper a dark and anonymous hint about Malinovsky - this act needs no further evaluation31*. It only remains to take into account that Martov's article (Gamma) was printed in November 1913. Just before that, in October 1913, an independent faction had been formed in the State Duma, namely the Russian Social-Democratic Workers' Faction, under the chairmanship of R. V. Malinovsky32*.

The formation of this faction and its activity, and consequently the activity33* of Malinovsky, caused extreme irritation and hatred towards him on the part of the liberals and liquidators.

But only L. Martov could, blinded by liberal malice against the representative of 4/5 of the organized Marxist workers, come to such a low act, similar to the acts which L. Martov had repeatedly committed abroad.

On the basis of all the foregoing, the S l e d s i d e r v i n g C o m m i s s i o n , taking into account the facts it has established concerning the spreading of rumors about Malinovsky's provocation, has come to the following conclusions:

The spreading of gossip and slanderous rumors about Malinovsky was carried out by, In the first place, Vologda exiled liquidators, including34* V. Vinogradov, were engaged in spreading gossip and slanderous rumors about Malinovsky; In the second place, the Viennese literati "Augustovtsy "35*, headed by Schär and N. Trotsky; c-3, St. Petersburg literary liquidators led by L. Martov.

The speech of L. Martov, who, irritated by Malinovsky's successful political struggle against the liquidators, hid himself under an unusual, new pseudonym and in the newspaper anonymously hinted at someone's connections with the guards, leaving it to his friends in private conversations to decipher the dark hint and spread the malicious slander in this way.

Concerning Trotsky, V. Sher and A. I. Vinogradov, the Special Committee states the undoubted fact that they violated their party duty and spread rumors (intellectual gossip) instead of reporting to a responsible and official governing institution. V. Sher's statement with his version of a "comrade's search" is considered criminal by the commission37*.

--------------------------------------------------

The Special Committee, considering it its duty and the duty of every democrat to fight decisively and mercilessly against both malicious and unconscious or careless spreading of gossip and slander, addresses

First, to all conscious and united Marxist workers, asking them to collect, if possible, additional data, to discuss the whole affair and to express their attitude to it; V-2, to all the democrats of Russia with a reminder of their unconditional duty, in view of the unheard-of attempts of slanderers on Malinovsky's political honor, to appear in the press with the exposure of the whole truth about every case of the spreading of rumors about Malinovsky. Only in the most exceptional and rare cases, when it is impossible to publish the names, places, dates, and contents of the "conversations" - such cases are extremely rare in the Malinovsky case - should one or another of the leading institutions or Burtsev be consulted.

Only such self-activity of all honest democrats and the widest publicity will help to put an end to the methods of struggle and the behavior of literary men of the type of L. Martov38*.

July, 1914.

Investigation Commission on the case of spreading vile rumors about R.V.Malinovsky.

Published - "Questions of History", 1993, No. 12, pp. 75-83.

Fund 2, op. 1, d. 27130, fol. 356-364, 367-393, 418 - autographs of G.E.Zinoviev, V.A.Tikhomirnov and V.I.Lenin.

1* Above is the text of G.E.Zinoviev. Further the text is written by V.A.Tikhomirnov

2* Further text by G.E.Zinoviev

3* Further text by V.I.Lenin

4* Corrected by V.I.Lenin from: "meeting each other".

5* "it did not turn out that they" - written by V.I.Lenin instead of the crossed out: "did not decide immediately and without the slightest hesitation that suspicions"

6* "of a man ... Marxist" - written by V.I.Lenin instead of the crossed out: "organized Marxist".

7* Further V.I.Lenin crossed out: "liberal".

8* "with painful ... enmity" - written by V.I.Lenin instead of the crossed out: "'completely insane or having lost his head, honor and shame in frenzied liquidationist bitterness'".

9* Further crossed out: "liberal-liquidator".

10* Written by V.I.Lenin instead of the crossed out: "by liquidators".

11* Written by V.I.Lenin instead of crossed out: "three members".

12* Next, V.I.Lenin crossed out "formal"

13* Written by V.I.Lenin instead of crossed out: "not".

14* Further V.I.Lenin crossed out: "dirty".

15* Further V.I.Lenin crossed out: "can".

16* Written by V.I.Lenin instead of crossed out: "13th".

17* Further V.I.Lenin crossed out: "all".

18* "1) Quote from N.I.Bukharin's letter of December 13, 1913. The letter in the original and in a copy with Bukharin's signatures, is available in the materials of the Investigative] Committee." (Note by V.I. Lenin).

19* Written by V.I.Lenin instead of the crossed out: "unreliability".

20* Further crossed out by V.I.Lenin: "directly or through the liquidating members of the State Duma, etc.".

21* "his intimate comrades" - written by V.I.Lenin instead of the crossed out: "intimate friends".

22* "this fact ... situation" - written by V.I.Lenin instead of the crossed out one - "from the point of view of logically thinking people it is obligatory to suggest further".

23* Further, Lenin crossed out: "by Trotsky and other persons present at Trotsky's conversation with Sher".

24* "of the Tsekist organization" - written by V.I.Lenin instead of the crossed out: "Bund".

25* "of this organization" - written by V.I.Lenin instead of the crossed-out "Bund"

26* "to the members of... organization" - written by V.I.Lenin instead of crossed out: "Pole and Latvian"; then he also crossed out: "in spite of the fact, or rather precisely because the Bolsheviks absolutely distrusted the archiliquidator leaders of the Bund at that time and refused to have any political dealings with them".

27* "worker" - written by V.I.Lenin instead of the crossed-out "Bundovite".

28* "to that organization... belonged to" - written by V.I.Lenin instead of crossed out: "Bund".

29* "reports" - written by V.I.Lenin instead of crossed out: "document".

30* "states ... institution" - written by V.I.Lenin instead of the crossed out: "states that the handing institution of the Truthists"

31* "this act ... It seems possible to compare it only with the act of a man who, disguised and hidden, eavesdrops at the door in order to pass on to his "friends" scraps of overheard speeches in the most slanderous formulation. To explain this immeasurable baseness and meanness of L. Martov's deed remains".

32* Further Lenin crossed out: "Fulfilling the will of the majority of the organized Marxist workers of Russia, Malinovsky, at the head of all the workers' deputies from 6 provinces, acted to expose the disorganization of the workers' movement by the liquidators (condemned more than once by Party decisions) and to free the Duma representation of the working class of Russia from its distortion by the liquidationist deputies. Acting in this way, Malinovsky certainly fulfilled the direct duty of any organized Marxist worker" (l. 45-46). Before this text Lenin marked: "See page 46. 46"

33* "Education... activity" - written by Lenin instead of the crossed out: "It is clear that this political..."

34* "including" - written by V.I.Lenin instead of the crossed out: "headed by V.Sher and".

35* "Augustists" - written instead of crossed out: "liquidators".

36* Further crossed out: "in the lowest and meanest form".

37* "Speech ... criminal" - written instead of crossed out: "To what extent this dissemination had the character of malicious political revenge of the liquidators against their political opponent or of 'mere' intellectual gossip, the significance of which may not be realized either in a temporary eclipse or in extreme mental limitations, the Svednaya Komissiya has no precise data, leaving this question therefore open".

38* "literary men of the type of L. Martov" - forwarded by V.I. Lenin from: "literary Cheberyachki".

1The conclusion of the Investigation Commission is written by G.E.Zinoviev (first section and the beginning of the 3rd section), V.A.Tikhomirnov (2nd section) and V.I.Lenin (after Zinoviev to the end). In the second section Tikhomirnov outlined R.V.Malinovsky's autobiography submitted to the Investigative Commission (see: Voprosy istorii, 1993, No. 11-12, pp. 70-74). All the attention of the authors of the conclusion is focused on criticizing the testimony of the Mensheviks. The testimony of the Bolsheviks, who suspected Malinovsky of provocation, is not analyzed. (Compare the materials of the Investigative Commission on the Malinovsky case: Voprosy Historii, 1993, Nos. 9, 10, 11-12). The conclusion prepared in July 1914 was supposed to be published in Pravda or in a separate brochure, but the defeat of the editorial office on July 8 (21), 1914, prevented this. Perhaps the surviving text of the conclusion was not final, and work on it resumed in September-October 1914 after Lenin and Zinoviev arrived in Bern from Krakow.

2This refers to a resolution of the Central Committee of the RSDLP published in Trudovaya Pravda No. 3 of May 31 (June 13), 1914: "From the All-Russian Institution of Marxists. The governing institution, having familiarized itself with the explanations of R. Malinovsky, as well as with the resolutions of the various groups of organized workers, and having taken into account the statement of the RSDR faction printed in No. 91 of "Trudovaya Pravda", comes to the following conclusion.

I.   1) No matter how difficult the conditions of work of the members of the RSDR faction may be, the workers' deputies are obliged to remain in office in spite of any difficulties. 2) The resignation of office by a working-class deputy without the knowledge of the Marxist whole, without prior explanation with the workers' voters and with his comrades in the Duma faction is a fact of monstrous breach of discipline and disorganization, which deserves the severest condemnation on the part of all conscious workers of Russia.

II.  From a consideration of the circumstances of Malinovsky's departure and his personal explanations, the governing body comes to the conviction that Malinovsky's act has no political background and is entirely the result of acute nervousness, mental fatigue, and a temporary eclipse, in the state of which R. V. Malinovsky committed this flagrant breach of discipline.

III.  The governing institution states that by his act Malinovsky has placed himself outside the ranks of the organized Marxists and that only a special "decision" of the Marxist whole could change this situation and reopen Malinovsky's access to work in the ranks of organized Social-Democracy, if this question were to be raised in the future by the organized workers.

IV.  The governing body, in the exercise of its duty, investigated the question of the rumors that had been spread by means of which Malinowski's political reputation was being cast. The investigation revealed that there is no decisive evidence to initiate an investigation of Malinowski for suspected political dishonesty. The governing institution is unquestionably convinced of Malinowski's political integrity.

V.  The Steering Committee expresses its firm conviction that the Moscow workers, to whom Malinovsky's step has dealt a particularly severe blow, will make every effort to ensure that in the person of the new elected member of the Moscow workers of the RSDR the faction receives a worthy member who is ready to carry the banner of consistent Marxism to the end.

VI.  The Steering Committee draws the attention of the workers to the inadmissible methods of slander to which the liquidators have resorted in connection with Malinovsky's departure in order to disorganize the workers' movement. The Steering Committee invites the workers to give a decisive response to the slanderers and to exert all their energies to strengthen the ranks of organized Marxists by putting an end to the slander campaign.

VII.   The Steering Institution welcomes the energetic participation of the workers' groups in the discussion of an important moment in the life of the Marxist whole and sees in the condemnation of Malinowski's move expressed in their resolutions a defence of the principle of discipline, and sees in the resolute repulse of the slanderers-liquidators the guarantee of the further growth of the Marxist workers' organizations.

The workers' movement is not held together by individuals. The workers' movement is strong in the participation of the masses, in proletarian discipline, in the organization of tens and hundreds of thousands of workers. All conscious workers will rally even more closely around their representatives under the banner of consistent Marxism".

3The newspaper "Way of Truth" published several RSDRF statements about Malinovsky (see Nos. 82, 84, 87, 90 and 91 of May 10, 12, 15, 18 and 20, 1914 (st.)). They reported that there were no political differences between the RSDR faction and Malinovsky, that the faction's treasury was completely intact, and that Malinovsky had not informed the faction of his resignation from the State Duma. Malinovsky's behavior was sharply condemned. "The Guiding Institution" (Central Committee of the RSDLP), in addition to the resolution on Malinovsky (see note 2), published a statement "To the Case of the Slanderers" (see: Trudovaya Pravda, 1914, No. 15, June 14 (27) and Voprosy Historii, 1993, No. 10, pp. 106-108).

4The uprising of the garrison of the Sveaborg fortress (near Helsingfors, Finland) began on July 17 (30), was suppressed on July 20 (August 2), 1906, 43 participants were executed, several hundred were sent to prisons and hard labor.

Elections to the Second State Duma were held in January-February 1907.

5The first congress of factory and factory doctors and representatives of factory and factory industry took place in Moscow in April 1909, the First All-Russian congress of representatives of cooperative institutions took place there in April 1908, the First All-Russian congress of representatives of societies of national universities took place in St. Petersburg in January 1908.

6The First All-Russian congress to combat drunkenness was held in St. Petersburg in December 1909. - January 1910.

7The correspondence in the newspaper "Social-Demokrat" No. 23, September 1 (14), 1911, is meant. - "Meeting of figures of the legal labor movement".

8The reference is to R.V. Malinovsky's autobiography submitted to the Investigative Commission of the Central Committee of the RSDLP (see: Voprosy istorii, 1993, No. 11-12, p. 73).

9The second congress of factory doctors was held in Moscow in April 1911.

10The Moscow Committee of the RSDLP.

11The Foreign Conference of Bolsheviks in 1909. - A meeting of the expanded editorial board of Proletarian, which took place in Paris in June 1909. V.M. Shulyatikov participated in the meeting as a representative of the Moscow regional organization; he had correspondence and other contacts with the Bolshevik center.

12Here and below V.I.Lenin refers to N.I.Bukharin's letter to him of November 30 (December 13), 1913 (see: Izvestiya TsK CPSU, 1989, No. 4, pp. 206-207) and to Bukharin's testimony to the Investigation Commission of the Central Committee of the RSDLP (see: Voprosy istorii, 1996, No. 9, p. 120). Bukharin, having familiarized himself with the conclusion of the Investigation Commission in November 1914, protested against the assessments of the behavior of V.V. Sher and A.I. Vinogradov contained in this document and against the use of the confidential information obtained from him (see Bukharin's letter to the RSDLP Foreign Bureau in November-December 1914. - Voprosy istorii, 1993, No. 11-12, pp. 83-84).

13V.V. Sher's letter to R.V. Malinovsky is missing from the materials of the Investigative Commission.

14The supplement to the newspaper "Social-Demokrat" No. 27 of June 4 (17), 1912, published information about a meeting in May 1911 of Moscow and St. Petersburg Mensheviks - figures of the legal workers' movement.

15The supporters of the "August Bloc", formed in August 1912.

16It is about the members of the Central Committee of the RSDLP V.I.Lenin and G.E.Zinoviev, who was the third person engaged in the investigation of the rumors about the provocation of R.V.Malinovsky at the end of 1913 - it was not possible to establish.

17L.Martov's article "From Step to Step" was published in the legal Menshevik "Novaya Rabochaya Gazeta" No. 81 of November 13 (26), 1913. The accusation of the Bolshevik Dansky (K.A.Komarovsky) of "double-handedness" was based on the fact of his simultaneous participation in the Social-Democratic (Pravda newspaper, magazine "Questions of Insurance") and bourgeois (newspaper "Industry and Trade") press. Martov's words about the possibility of even more "reprehensible" bipartisanship were deciphered as a hint of provocation in the Bolshevik milieu. A commission of representatives of the Central Committee of the RSDLP, the Duma Six, the editors of Pravda and the journal Enlightenment recognized Dansky's actions as fundamentally wrong, but at the same time considered the suspicions of provocation unfounded.

18The message (by whom exactly it was received - it has not been established) concerned I.L. Eisenstadt (Yudin), a member of the Central Committee of the RSDLP and the Central Committee of the Bund. The Commission of the Foreign Bureau of the Central Committee of the RSDLP to investigate and verify the rumors of central provocation (1911-1913), "having considered the materials at its disposal, came to the unanimous conclusion that the suspicions expressed against Mr. Yudin were completely unfounded". At the same time, the commission "was convinced that there was a central provocation in the RSDLP in general" (RCCHIDNI, f. 332, op. 1, d. 50, fol. 200).

19Error. It should read "Novaya Rabochaya Gazeta" (see doc. 53, note 4).

20It refers to the article "To the Attention of Organized Workers" in the newspaper "For Pravda" No. 40 of November 20 (December 3), 1913.