V. I.

Lenin

125

To:   THE CENTRAL COMMITTEE OF THE R.S.D.L.P.

To the C.C.

16.X. 05

Dear Comrades, I have talked to Ivan Vasilich’s messenger and yesterday sent a
telegram giving my consent. I authorise Ivan Vasilich or Sergei Vasilich to
make the necessary cuts in the
Poor , [2] if it is taken away from Petrov. I agree to its being
taken from Petrov, but only on condition that this will not mean a break
with Petrov, or a sheer deception of Petrov on my part, since I gave Petrov permission to try to arrange this thing. This means it is
necessary
1) at least to compensate Petrov for expenses already incurred (Ivan
Vasilich’s messenger agreed to this);
2) to get Petrov’s consent to submit to the decision of the higher body
(i.e., I permitted Petrov to make a try, while the C.C. decided to hand it
over to Belov—so that Petrov should not have reason to consider me an
unreliable business partner). If Petrov has already succeeded in arranging
things, I would strongly advise against taking it away from him, for I do not see how Belov is
better than Petrov;
3) please get in touch with my
sister [1] on this matter (she can easily be communicated with), since she might have
already made some arrangements in my name.

As for Petrov, I shall inform everybody here that
1) the C.C. did not endorse the contract;
2) we are within our rights in negotiating with Petrov on each separate
instance since no monopoly has been established;
3) it is advisable to deal with the C.C. publishers as more advantageous
and closer to the Party.

That seems to be all. Write and let me know whether I have understood
you correctly.

Your agreement with Nolin is good, but I am afraid it might be
fictitious. An “editorial committee”=7—4—1=2!! And these two are
burdened with other things!! This is a fiction, not an editorial
committee. Besides, after signing an agreement with Nolin you all give
heaps of work (Radin, Kamenev, Werner, Schmidt, Lyadov, Bazarov,
Fedorovich, etc., etc. —unless Belov has deceived me?) to Belov. What
does this mean? Nolin for the soul and Belov for the body, is that it? If
our meeting does not take place, you will be kind enough to explain to me
thoroughly by letter what is the matter. It is altogether out of the
question for people in the underground or members of the R.S.D.L.P. to
engage in the complex and bothersome business of publishing. That is why
Belov (and Petrov no less than Belov) is getting ahead of us. And I
seriously warn you that that is how it will be, for Belov has enterprising
people who give themselves wholly to the business, while Nolin’s
“editorial committee” (you can be sure) will not be able to devote even
one-hundredth of its energies to this work. We shall keep on
talking, arguing, bargaining, holding meetings (we have been engaged in
this laudable occupation ever since summer, for six months ), while
Belov and Petrov will do business. I am not blaming anybody, for it would
be absurd to do that—it is inevitable under the circumstances. This will
change
1) if freedom is won—and then everything will change; or
2) if Pyatnitsky goes about it like Belov and Petrov, which he cannot do since he is occupied
with a host of other things.

P.S. Received Rabochy No. 2. I shall write you about the
feuilleton in detail. The author should not have tackled such subjects: the
result is a sort of “sentimental” socialism, which is very
dangerous. [3]