Amendments and Remarks on the Draft Charter of the Foreign Organization of Russian Revolutionary Social-Democracy{128}

Charter

*Sections 4 and 5 are crossed out by Lenin. On separate sheets he wrote the following text of Section 5. Ed.

*This section is crossed out by Lenin. Ed.

**This section is crossed out by an unknown hand. Ed.

16. All administrative matters are decided by simple majority vote[161].

17. All monetary sums received by members of the organization for revolutionary purposes are deposited in the common fund.

18. All incoming sums are expended on: 1) general administration, 2) publication of *Iskra*, 3) publication of the *Workers' Library*, 4) publication of *Zarya*.

19. New members are accepted on the recommendation of 5 members of the organization and with the consent of a 2/3 majority of all members of the organization.

20. Members are expelled from the organization by a 2/3 majority of all members of the organization.

21. In those cities where there are several members of the organization, all their activity, except for special assignments from the administration, must be collective.

22. In the event of dissolution of the organization, the printing shop and warehouses are returned to their original owners[162].

Written between April 24 (May 7) and July 11 (24), 1901.

Published for the first time from the manuscript.

---

Materials for the Article "A New Massacre"

* This paragraph is crossed out by Lenin in the manuscript. Ed.

No. 3150 Here and below Lenin lists the numbers of *Iskra* in which correspondence and reports on demonstrations by workers and students in various cities of Russia were published.

1. 200 people stopped work and presented "unfounded demands."

α. [Even by Russian law, to "stop work" is only a judicial fine.] β. Who judges what demands are "unfounded"?

The assistant director of the factory.

2. The police forcibly began to stop the machines and "meanwhile," as the police expressed it, "all workers stopped work."

[The question arises: in what did the violence consist? If everyone left, how could the machines not be stopped? In leaving, they stopped the machines—where is the "force" in that? Schutz der Arbeitsstillegung??[163]]

3. 2 squadrons were summoned (150?? х 2 = 300) + a detachment (100–150???) + 200 constables [Ergo[164], probably > 500 people].

4. Workers (3600) occupied the street and stopped the streetcar.

5. The police attack (with demand to disperse) was repulsed with stones.

[From behind fences and from the crowd. A hail of stones. The workers proved that they fight well.]

6. An armed unit was summoned – gunfire from the crowd.

7. 3 volleys – 1 killed + 8 wounded (1 died).

8. Companies of the Omsk infantry regiment. [Stones from yards].

"Superficial"

1. Partly – "propaganda of anti-state and anti-social ideas"(!)

– "harmful false doctrines"

– "dark ideas and hopes."

2. But – "existing conditions are favorable"

– "arouse and maintain discontent."

3. (What are these conditions?).

4. "Unfortunately, we know too little."

["Regret"…]

5. (α) "Workers tear themselves away from their village nests"… "live in… a special social-ethical atmosphere, created… thanks to… the concentration of masses, bound together not by living social interests, but by the commonality of machines."

(β) "The villager tears himself away from the village with its modest, but independent social-economic interests and relations."

6. A nasty attack on the non-Russians.

[["rude and greedy".]]

7. (γ) Capitalism: minimum wage for maximum labor… helplessness in unemployment.

8. Program: "governmental guardianship."

"To insist."

9. "Just like"… 1861 (!!)

"Wise persuasion."

Written at the end of May 1901.

Published for the first time from the manuscript.

---

Materials for the Article "Persecutors of the Zemstvo and Hannibals of Liberalism"

1. Persecutors of the Zemstvo and Hannibals of Liberalism{129}

Liberal Reflections on the Remnants of the Zemstvo

And the publication in general presents considerable interest[165]

…………………..................................................................

more interesting points[166]……………….............……..

comparatively less important: starting with simple observations by foreign observers and scholars. There is Mackenzie Wallace, author of the well-known (not known to the Russian public, of course) English book on Russia, speaking of the zemstvo: "This institution, by its form, is purely parliamentary, i.e., it consists of an assembly of elected representatives from the population." There is the opinion of a French writer on matters of state law, Demombynes: "the institution of zemstvo, provincial and district assemblies may be regarded as the point of departure for an era of reforms, which necessarily extend all the way to the legislative power." There are references to the history of Prussia. Municipal self-government was introduced here already in 1808, and Stein, who carried out this reform, connected it with the future introduction of a constitution. From municipal self-government, there was a gradual transition to provincial diets. Despite their aristocratic composition, these diets began from 1842 onwards to petition for the convocation of an all-state representative body. There had to be established in Berlin joint sessions of committees from all these diets with merely consultative voice on questions proposed to them by the government. "This united Landtag, not content with its merely consultative significance, began to strive for authoritative participation in supreme government, at first in the very respectful form of thanksgivings addresses, and then through direct opposition to the wishes and will of the king." And three years after its convocation, this consultative Landtag became the constitutional parliament of 1848."[167]

Speaking plainly and directly, one must openly acknowledge that Mr. R. N. S. shamelessly flirts with the political prejudices of the broad mass of zemstvo liberals just as the *Workers' Thought* flirts with the political prejudices of the broad mass of workers. For revolutionary social-democracy to countenance such flirtation would be just as insane and criminal in the first case as in the second. It is a prejudice to think that great reforms were devised not for the greater triumph of bureaucracy – that the zemstvo has great political significance – that the existence of the zemstvo represents the best opportunity to give the country a moderate constitution – that the banner of the struggle for political freedom in Russia can be the slogan of "rights and authoritative all-Russian zemstvo."

2. Plan of the Article

Introductory Remarks                          1–3

Opinion of Foreigners                          4–5[168]

I

Liberal Movement of the 60s                  6–18 – Revolutionary Movement

II

19-23 – Half-hearted Character of Zemstvo Reform

Reaction                                          24–29 – Reaction

III

Revolutionary Movement of the 70s and the New Era                   30–41

IV

Reaction                                          42-56

V

VI

The Question of the Significance of the Zemstvo               79–92

*This line is crossed out by Lenin. Ed.

3. Extract from the journal *Svobodnoye Slovo*{130}

3. S. Eighteen Years of War Between Officialdom and the Zemstvo. *Svobodnoye Slovo* No. 53 – (20.1.1883)

[was also a separate pamphlet]

…As is known… The Statute on Zemstvo Institutions of 1864 did not at all give what public opinion demanded…

…The Government – through the voice of its official organs – the *Northern Mail* and even governors – sought to calm the fears that arose[169] by pointing out that the new institutions were merely an experiment, as if a school of representation, and hinted at their expansion… (*Svobodnoye Slovo* No. 53, p. 6).

…In 8 central provinces, personal landowners, numbering 93,900 people with land ownership of 119,880 square versts, have 1817 delegates, whereas the peasant population, consisting of 5,800,000 with 181,440 square versts of land, had only 1597 representatives… (No. 55, p. 6).

In No. 57 (§ VI of the article) S. S. sets forth in detail the helplessness of the zemstvo in the matter of collecting arrears from landowners and notes the unequal taxation of privately-owned and peasant land:

Rostov district of Yaroslavl province – land belonging to peasants, valued at 12 rubles (with payment of 13 kopecks), allotted land – 16 rubles (20 kopecks), landowner land – 10 rubles (11 kopecks!). and so on. In Kaluga province the zemstva even introduced a head tax on peasants.

"However, this resolution was protested by the governor, which gave the bureaucracy an occasion to appear as the defender of the masses against the injustice of zemstvo representation – though the latter took on a narrow-estate character thanks to the laws and tricks devised by that same bureaucracy" (p. 6, No. 57).

§ VII (No. 59) – on public education:

The Statute on Public Schools of 1864 – "properly speaking, a strange compromise between the bureaucratic principle, clerical tendencies, and the interests of the zemstvo school – but which, compared with subsequent enactments, and especially the Statute of 1874, the zemstva now recall with regret" (p. 8).

"In 1869 inspectors of public schools were appointed – one per province. In 1871 the Ministry of Public Enlightenment undermines the Statute of 1864 by means of an instruction to these newly established school inspectors" (No. 59, p. 8) – among other things, the right to dismiss teachers… "The new institution of school officials was not slow to show itself in practice – and already in 1873, on the recommendation of one of them, Mr. Druzhinin, the closure of the zemstvo technical school in the city of Rzhev was ordered – for non-compliance with the requirement of the curator for the dismissal of those stigmatized…" [Sic?[170] I do not know what this means] "by Mr. Druzhinin of pupils."

[stigmatized, in the words of S. S. (as is evident from what follows), means discredited: "he stigmatized them as politically unreliable people"]

No. 60 (conclusion).

The Rescript of 25. XII. 1873 had almost no consequences (due to "the absolute passivity of our leaders of the nobility") "except for some encouragement of denunciations against school workers" (p. 11).

!!! "In any case, it is characteristic that there were voices in society that welcomed the rescript, in the hope that the leaders of the nobility, as an element still connected to the zemstvo, could paralyze the significance of school inspectors, an element unmistakably of a police character."

The Statute on Public Schools that appeared in 1874 "dashed even these hopes" – it gave all power over the administration of schools into the hands of directors and inspectors.

Examples of police outrage by inspectors (at best – mere bureaucratic red tape).

The conclusion of S. S. – the necessity of state self-government…

Written in June 1901.

Published for the first time from the manuscript.

---

Materials for the Article "Serfs at Work"

1. The Planting of Landowners

* Consequently. Ed.

155 Reference is made to Article 762, Volume IX of the "Digest of Laws of the Russian Empire," which states: "Among those living in the Russian Empire are counted non-Russians: 1) Siberian non-Russians; 2) Samoyeds of Arkhangelsk province; 3) Nomadic non-Russians of Stavropol province; 4) Kalmyks, roaming in Astrakhan and Stavropol provinces; 5) Kirghiz of the Inner Horde; 6) non-Russians of Akmolinsk, Semipalatinsk, Semirechensk, Ural, and Turgay regions; 7) the non-Russian population of the Transcaspian region; 8) Jews."

* To the point. Ed.

156 In the newspaper *Russkiye Vedomosti* No. 210, August 1, 1901, an editorial note was published devoted to discussion of the law of June 8, 1901, "On the Allotment of State Lands to Private Individuals in Siberia." The note presented, using the example of Ufa province, information confirming facts about enormous profits for the nobility and the impoverishment and ruin of the peasant masses as a result of the application of the law. Some data from this note were copied by Lenin.

B) A period of up to 99 years (art. 13).

Only to the nobility… (art. 11) ("desirable in governmental purposes…").

Rental payment no less than the peasant obrok [feudal tax] (art. 16).

"       is not levied in the first 5 years (art. 16).

For non-payment of rent, a penalty (1/2 % per month), and after a year – the land is confiscated… (art. 18).

But "in particularly worthy cases" a deferral of up to 3 years is permitted (art. 19).

Transfer of lease [" for more than 1 harvest" NB, NB[171]] – with permission (art. 20).

Work on leased land is certified by officials of the Ministry of Agriculture and State Properties (art. 21).

Sale for 5% and repayment within a period of 37 years (art. 25).

[And the sale price = rental payment х 20] (art. 23).

Payment may be deferred up to 1 year (by the administration of state properties)

– up to 3 years (by the minister).

[The law went through a special conference on the affairs of the nobility.]

2. The Planting of Landowners

A New Handout to the Noble Nobility[172]

1. A law has been issued on the allotment of land to private individuals in Siberia – and both by the time of its appearance and by its character, it is extremely important (more important than by its probable consequences) and deserves attention.

2. For a long time our government has been giving all kinds of support to the nobility – both the Gentry Bank, and sugar norms, and little places for the land captains, and the sale of alcohol to the state treasury, and so forth – but now to the handout is added also the subjection of the population to landowners.

3. The new law creates a new class of exploiters – parasitism at the expense of thousands and millions of the dispossessed.

4. The Foundations of the Law.

Gentry plots (Special Conference). Sale (not to non-Russians) and lease only to the nobility.

5. Quantity – 3000 (!). Period 99 years.

6. Preferential sale (37 years) and lease (free for 5 years).

7. Special exemptions (deferral of arrears; > 3000 desyatinas at the free price, etc.).

8. "Intermixed" and 1 harvest.

9. Probable resale. A nice gift. (Example from Ufa province.) For evaluation

10. – (4).

11. – (0).

12. – (2).

13. – (3).

14. – (5) and (6).

15. In an era of crisis and famine – here is the government's very first concern. Here the government reveals all its innermost nature, the nature of a serf-owner. It should be noted:

(1) Comparison with famine. A handout of several million.

(2) Connection with resettlement. (Fear of resettlement due to the rising cost of labor in Russia.) Formation of a permanent class of hired laborers in Siberia.

["intermixed"][173] (3) Connection with political "purposes": the creation of a "zemstvo" element in Siberia in opposition to "exiled" intelligentsia in Siberia.

(4) The issuance of the law precisely after the completion of the railway and the abolition of exile[174].

(5) The reduction of the comparatively well-off and independent peasantry of Siberia to the level of semi-serfs.

(6) It reveals the true view of the Russian government on the significance of large landed property as the best prop of arbitrary rule and plundering regime, as the best bridle for the mass of working people.

3. Variant of the End of the Article

The government and its supporters, publicists of the gentry orientation (newspapermen defending the interests of the nobility) naturally try to cover up this brazen plunder with all manner of elevated phrases: they speak of the development of culture on model farms. By the development of culture here is meant the transfer from Russia to Siberia of semi-serf arrangements, with the hopeless situation of impoverished peasants, compelled in fact to perform barshchina just as in the old days. Model farms are not created by means of bureaucratic directives and embezzlement, and land allotments lead either to mere brokerage by the nobility, who enrich themselves on resale with even greater shamelessness than those kulaks, usurers, etc., upon whom they look with such contempt. Instead of model farms, what results, when the land is not resold – is farming by the enserfment of peasants, by means of all sorts of usurious dealings (loans of money, grain in exchange for labor, etc.), i.e., genuine kulak farming. They also speak of the political significance of the gentry-estate element: in Siberia, where the local intelligentsia is dominated by the exiled, it is necessary, they say, to create a reliable bulwark of state power, a zemstvo element. And in these discussions of the political significance of large landholders, there is far more and far deeper truth than those who use this argument imagine. Such reasoning shows clearly what kind of prop is necessary for the existence of a police state: it needs to create a class of large exploiters, who would be obligated to the state in all respects, dependent upon it always (for instance, with regard to those leasing state lands, the government can, under certain conditions, take away the lands), who would extract their income by the basest means (kulak dealings, brokerage, usury) and by virtue of this would always be faithful supporters of any arbitrary rule and oppression. The Asiatic policy of the government requires support in Asiatic large landownership, in the serf system of "granting estates" (if now it is impossible to grant estates populated with serfs, as they granted in the last century, then instead they grant lands interspersed with peasant population, which from necessity will be forced to engage in the same barshchina). We are thus willing to agree with the *Moscow News* and the *Citizen*, that the planting of landowners is indeed necessary in the political purposes of the tsarist government: an absolute tsar at the present time cannot maintain himself without serf means, etc. Bourgeois (moderne[175]) policy toward the free lands of the borderlands consists in selling them to farmers and peasants, who create a mass, sufficiently dense population (as in America), present enormous demand for bourgeois products, and provoke unprecedented revival of all industrial life. Serf policy consists in restraining resettlement, in bureaucratic guardianship of all population movement, in the granting (direct or under the guise of sale and lease) of state lands to large landholders, extracting income by means of enserfment.

And the especially important significance of the new law consists precisely in that… [176]

Written in August – early September 1901.

First published in 1932 in Lenin Collection XIX.

Printed from the manuscript.

---

Remarks on the Article by Ryazanov "Two Truths"{131}

Page

1. The author places at the forefront words of Marx (on 2 paths), which were spoken essentially under conditions and in exceptional circumstances. But the author distorts the matter, imposing on Marx precisely this formulation of the question about 2 paths.

7. The "laughter" at the 70s (the turning of the wheel of history) proves not "only the absolute inability to assume a historical viewpoint," – it also proves theoretical degradation of the 70s compared with the people of the 40s and 60s.

7a. By emphasizing that Mikhailovsky opposed V. V. and not saying that Mikhailovsky far more often and far more was in solidarity with V. V., the author whitewashes Mikhailovsky.

8. This is a glaring falsehood: to charge Mikhailovsky precisely with the tragedy of the death of the "People's Will" and "going to the people." The article is devoted to Mikhailovsky, whose downfall is precisely persönlich[177], and in whose fate there is tragedy for a farthing, but comedy for a whole ruble.

9. This is foolish – to confuse criticism of Mikhailovsky with "hurling dirt at the generation of revolutionary socialists of the 70s."

9. NB "refuses" to trace the reflection of the revolutionary majority in legal literature.

9–10. Do all the "Gekreuzigte und Verbannte[178]" (of the 70s)?? listen eagerly to the voice of the profane?

13. "Public questions are replaced by personal questions" (and to the end of the page NB). |??|

(Pisarevism.)

15… (Pisarev) "Life-sermon of personal happiness"

_ _ _ "of individualistic ideals." |??|

18.   "   "   "with their whole being immersed in questions of personal self-perfection."

24–25. (§ III) Utopian socialism of the revolutionaries (of the 70s) is characterized, confused with the direction of Mikhailovsky.

28–29. Mikhailovsky often "sacrificed" one of the truths. But we are not interested in the "later phase" of his activity. Mikhailovsky concerns us only as the exponent of a definite tendency among the youth of the 70s and 80s.

31. What "limits" are set "to intellect by nature"? (Theory of Knowledge.)

29–35. Exposition of the "system of truth."

35… This system "tries to find in reality such a social element…" which "would be interested in the realization of the ideal."

41. From the dispute with Yuzov and Co. (dry paraphrase) – a leap to Yakovenko (1886).

46–48. Pendant = Tkachev[179].

Then Axelrod and the transition to social-democracy.

All this is set forth tediously and relates very little to "the 2 preceding" and to Mikhailovsky.

And N. – he (52)!! – with the conclusions from him drawn by Mikhailovsky (53).

§ V, from page 57 – 77 (pp. 78–80 on "critics") – the birth of Marxism. Deadly boredom; only on page 82 does it return to the "old truth."

– 85 – We reject the division of the world into noumena and phenomena{132}.

Written in September–October 1901.

Published for the first time from the manuscript.

---

Materials for the Article "The Struggle Against the Starving"

Three principal circumstances stand out from the circular of August 17:

A) Bureaucratic organization: governors, district leaders of the nobility, land captains.

B) Norms in the determination of need and loans.

[points 5 and 10]          ("Just so they don't die."

("Starve, but don't die.")

C) "Anti-governmental agitation."

[point 16]      This is a lie, for there have been no cases of using aid for rebellions, demonstrations, etc.

This is not a struggle against hunger, but a struggle against the hungry, and chiefly a struggle against aid to the hungry.

(Ad[180] A.)

(1) all these are officials, buried under a mountain of bureaucratic and chiefly police duties. The Ministry finally decides the question of recognition of % of poor harvest.

(2) governors: "the chief condition" of the success of their measures… all remaining officials are subordinate to them; according to their direction relief from the Red Cross is channeled; private individuals are referred to them; they approve the selection of assistants for organizing dining halls, etc.

(3) district leaders of the nobility

– supervise in the districts the interests of landholders |"district central provision administration"| (4) land captains – compile lists – supervise public works in the district (point 14).

(5) Bureaucratic expenses are provided for (points 7 and 8).

(6) General instruction: economize the appropriated funds and – "demoralization," "exaggerated hopes"…

What is Original in the Circular of August 17.

1. The extent of the disaster (12 provinces).

2. Non-implementation of the new organization of the food supply matter (12. VI. 1900).

3. "The chief condition" of the success of "all" (!) measures – that the governors take "special" measures (etc.)

(and this article 322 speaks of "the improvement of the welfare of cities and villages," and article 323: the division of measures to ensure the people's food supply into "general" and "special").

4. Discussion of which districts are "poor in harvest." "The final decision on this question falls within the jurisdiction of the Ministry" (!!)

(5) Do not count as poor in harvest —

1. when < 1/3 of volosts

2. when the shortage of bread is "usual" and "from year to year" purchased with money earned in other ways

3. when it is possible to manage with local resources.

(6) About "districts poor in yield" notice will be published in the "Government Herald."

(7) Special persons, supervising food supply in districts – "district leaders of the nobility"

*Correct. Ed.

[= "district central provision administration"].

(8) In provinces (with a significant number of affected districts) + 1000–1500 rubles for "bureaucratic expenses of provincial councils."

(9) The harm of premature compilation of lists: "exaggerated hopes" etc.

(10) Norm:

(a) average harvest per desyatina – average food supply norm (b) 48 poods per family (c) 48: 2.

(d) 48: 2 = 24. 24 – (33 %—10 %)… "… rarely exaggerated to any degree…" (11) For seeding not 1/2 of the 3-soul allotment [according to peasant statutes].

Moreover:

(а) economize the appropriated funds; (b) avoid "demoralizing" aid to the well-to-do.

(12) Aid to "those who can manage" is "no less harmful from the standpoint of state benefit and need," – than leaving without aid those truly in need (!)

(13) Public works… chiefly – from road capital, of which… > 2 1/2 million (!!) [that's all!] (14) Small public works according to the direction of land captains ("possible and useful works") and under their supervision of the funds.

(15) "Usually" "on quite a large scale" relief from the Red Cross.

(16) "Anti-governmental agitation" ("often," "usually") "arouses discontent and demanding spirit" ("need is not fully satisfied," "inevitable disruption of the economy" etc).

Written in October 1901.

Published for the first time from the manuscript.

---

List of Undiscovered Works by V. I. Lenin

List of Works by V. I. Lenin Not Yet Discovered to Date (May–December 1901)

A SKETCH OF A PARTY PROGRAM

This document was transmitted by Lenin to G. V. Plekhanov during his visit to Munich in early May 1901. In a letter to V. I. Lenin dated July 12, 1901, P. B. Axelrod wrote: "Now about the program. It seems to me that my brother [Plekhanov] took your sketch from you and took this matter upon himself." Further he reports that he read the sketch and "upon reading came away with the impression that it would serve as an introduction…" (Lenin Collection III, p. 199).

A POSTSCRIPT TO THE ARTICLE "PERSECUTORS OF THE ZEMSTVO AND HANNIBALS OF LIBERALISM"

In a letter to G. V. Plekhanov of July 30, 1901, V. I. Lenin wrote: "I sent the article against R. N. S. to press, softening a number of harsh points. I also wrote a small postscript to it, in which I drew a parallel between an article by Dragomanov ("Knock and it shall be opened") and R. N. S. to the advantage of the former" (Works, 4th ed., vol. 34, p. 64). This postscript did not appear in print.

A DRAFT STATUTE ON ISKRA ORGANIZATIONS IN RUSSIA

A LETTER TO M. T. ELIZAROV

In a letter to M. I. Ulyanova of May 6 (19), 1901, Lenin wrote: "I wrote to Mark just now and with extraordinary detail described for him how best to establish the 'regime'…" (Works, 4th ed., vol. 37, p. 251).

LETTERS TO A. I. ELIZAROVA

In a letter to P. B. Axelrod of August 4, 1901, V. I. Lenin mentions one letter: "in order to sort through all this better now, I am writing to my sister right away…" (Lenin Collection III, p. 232).

From letters to Maria Aleksandrovna Ulyanova, it is evident that V. I. Lenin corresponded with A. I. Elizarova, who at that time was abroad (see Works, 4th ed., vol. 37, pp. 256, 257, 253, 260).

A LETTER TO R. S. ZEMLACHKA

R. S. Zemlachka reports of this letter in her memoirs: "In 1901 I received a letter from Vladimir Ilyich saying that I was appointed an agent of *Iskra* and must leave immediately for Odessa" (see *Pravda* No. 213, August 4, 1938).

LETTERS TO E. D. STASOVA

E. D. Stasova reports of these letters in her memoirs: "I became personally acquainted with Vladimir Ilyich in autumn 1905 in Geneva, but our correspondence began much earlier – from 1901. The correspondence of that time was very lively and had not only a business character but also a purely friendly one" (see *Smena*, 1940, No. 4).

List of Works Possibly Belonging to V. I. Lenin

A NOTE "ST. PETERSBURG" (*ISKRA* NO. 7, AUGUST 1901).

The note was written in connection with the *Iskra* editorial board's receipt of a letter from a worker in Petersburg with an enthusiastic review of *Iskra* No. 4 and V. I. Lenin's article "Where to Begin?" and with information about the mood of Petersburg workers. At the end of the note it says: "As we are told, from July 7 the Obukhov factory again struck because the assistant director Ivanov, who had been laid off and was the cause of the first strike, appeared at the factory again." The events mentioned at the Obukhov factory are the subject of V. I. Lenin's article "A New Massacre" (see the present volume, pp. 14–19).

"NEW BARRIERS" (*ISKRA* NO. 9, OCTOBER 1901).

By theme and content, the note closely follows V. I. Lenin's articles "The Struggle Against the Starving," "Penal Regulations and Penal Judgment," as well as the article "Internal Review," in which V. I. Lenin refers to this article: "We will not dwell on such a – compared with the circular analyzed – 'trifle' as the circular of the same minister on strengthening supervision of charitable concerts, performances, and so forth (Cf. *Iskra* No. 9, "New Barriers.")" (See the present volume, p. 307).

List of Publications in the Editing of Which V. I. Lenin Participated

*Iskra* No. 4 – May 1901

*Iskra* No. 5 – June 1901

*Iskra* No. 6 – July 1901

*Iskra* No. 7 – August 1901

*Iskra* No. 8 – September 10, 1901

*Iskra* No. 9 – October 1901 (with supplement: "In Defense of the Ivanovo-Voznesensk Workers").

*Iskra* No. 10 – November 1901

*Iskra* No. 11 – November 20, 1901

*Iskra* No. 12 – December 6, 1901

*Iskra* No. 13 – December 20, 1901

Journal *Zarya* No. 2–3, December 1901

Pamphlet: "Documents of the 'Unification' Congress." Publication of the "League of Russian Revolutionary Social-Democracy," Geneva, 1901.

Statement of the Foreign League of Russian Revolutionary Social-Democracy. Published as a separate sheet at the end of 1901.