REVIEW OF L. B. KAMENEV'S ARTICLE
[1909, August, no later than the 27th]
Kamenev's second article 1 is unsuccessful at the beginning.
At first everything revolves (pp. 35-38-41) around Axelrod's quote 2
(p. 38) "side by side and in alliance" (with bourgeois revolutionary
factions).
Kamenev interprets this as opportunism: an obvious quibble and
obvious inaccuracy, because *beki* went with bourgeois revolutionary
(K. forgets this word) factions.
In my opinion, it is necessary to throw out everything up to p. 41 (or radically
redo it, shortening it to a couple of introductory phrases, unconditionally
removing the unsuccessful quote from Axelrod).
From pp. 41 to 59 the style needs to be carefully corrected.
1 The reference is to L. B. Kamenev's article "The Liquidation of the Hegemony of the Proletariat in the Menshevik History of the Russian Revolution."
L. B. Kamenev (Rosenfeld) – member of the party since 1901. After
the Second Congress of the RSDLP he joined the Bolsheviks. During the years of reaction, he held a
conciliatory position towards the liquidators, *otzovists,* and
Trotskyites. After the February bourgeois-democratic revolution
of 1917, he opposed the party's course towards a socialist revolution
and V. I. Lenin's April Theses.
After the October Socialist Revolution, he held a number of responsible
positions. He repeatedly opposed the Leninist policies of the party. In 1925 – one of the organizers of the "New Opposition," in
1926 – one of the leaders of the anti-party Trotskyist-Zinoviev
bloc. In 1934, he was expelled from the party for anti-party activities.
2 This refers to a quote from P. B. Axelrod's brochure "On the Question
of the Current Tasks and Tactics of the Russian Social Democrats," Geneva,
1898.
P. B. Axelrod, during the years of reaction and the new revolutionary upsurge, –
one of the leaders of the Menshevik liquidators.
26188
TO THE INVESTIGATIVE COMMISSION IN THE CASE OF COMRADE V. 1
[Later than January 15, 1910]
By decision of the Central Committee, the investigative commission 2 is entrusted with
the case, first, regarding suspicions about the political reliability
of Comrade V., and, second, regarding "unacceptable actions" on his part.
Having worked together with Comrade V. for the past year and a half,
we consider it our duty to inform the investigative commission of the following.

On the first point, our opinion, as members of the same
collegium, cannot be of significance, since here we are talking, we are sure, about some precise indications, facts, etc., which
the commission is fully able to verify. Expressing our readiness
to provide all references, information, and explanations that the commission
may require, we completely remove ourselves from this point, in the analysis of which we are not competent.
But on the second point, we consider it our duty to immediately
outline for the investigative commission the atmosphere that,
in our view, created completely abnormal conditions in the matter of accusations and attacks against Victor. This is an atmosphere
of fierce political struggle, factional malice, and personal hatred. Without understanding this atmosphere, one cannot correctly
relate to such speeches as the speeches of Comrade Maximov 3 in the Central Committee (V. –
"an indecent person"), to the attacks of Mr. Nathanson, "Gr.
Ivanovich," Mr. Andrikanis 4, etc.
Comrade V. was placed in a very responsible position as a
financier by the Bolshevik Center 5, and this circumstance
concentrated on him, on V., the hatred of many.
First of all, V. (together with Comrade Nikitich 6, a member of the BC,
who first appointed Victor as an agent in the inheritance case 7)
conducted a long, stubborn, desperate struggle with Mr. Andrikanis to
obtain a share of Ekaterina Pavlovna's inheritance 8. The struggle
lasted for months and years; dozens of negotiations were conducted, embittering
both sides to the extreme (because Andrikanis did not want
to acknowledge the debt); the struggle ended with a court case, which forced
Andrikanis to give up part 9. Andrikanis has still only given up
this part, whereas the other sister (V.'s wife) 10 has given
up everything.
From this, in our opinion, the hatred of Andrikanis is entirely explained. We resolutely protest against allowing
a person so personally interested in the inheritance case to act as a witness. We declare that Victor conducted the entire
inheritance case together with us, on our instructions,
under our control; we are entirely responsible for this matter and
protest against attempts to single out Comrade Victor in this matter.
Furthermore. Comrade Maximov in August 1908 voted in the BC
full confidence in Comrade Victor. Only when he and Nikitich
became convinced of Victor's resolute disagreement with the *otzovists*-
*ultimatumists*, of his resolute support for *Proletary* 11,
support for the policy of removing the *otzovists-ultimatumists* –
only then did Maximov and Nikitich become embittered enemies
of Victor, who worked harder than anyone else to ensure that the money
went to the BC, and not to the *otzovists*. We repeatedly in 1909,
before our complete split with Maximov, pointed out to him


and Nikitich the unacceptable nature of their malicious antics
against Victor, repeatedly demanded from them: accuse openly,
if you have grounds, but do not gossip, do not slander.
Therefore, we resolutely reject the attacks of Maximov,
Nikitich, and other *otzovists* on Victor's personal decency,
because these attacks are biased. They began on the basis of friction
within the BC over politics, they are exacerbated by the split in the BC.
The same applies entirely to Gr. Iv-ch, who carried out
the task of helping to obtain the inheritance and who, sympathizing
with Maximov and Co., directly said afterwards that he would not help
such a BC, which had removed Maximov 12. These attacks and this hatred also grew entirely on the basis of the
split in the BC.
Finally, Nathanson's attacks, which we heard at the plenum 13, cannot be considered impartial either. All
Nathanson's sympathies, like those of all Socialist-Revolutionaries, were on the side of the
*otzovists* – this is a well-known fact. The Socialist-Revolutionaries were terribly angry at
our removal of the *otzovists*. Before this removal, before the start of the split within the BC, neither Nathanson nor anyone else from
the Socialist-Revolutionaries ever formally and officially
expressed dissatisfaction with Victor in the BC. When the split occurred, then the Socialist-Revolutionaries
went so far as to make official statements against Victor!
We therefore ask the commission to clarify by questions to each
accuser of Victor, did this accuser know about Victor's work
in favor of the BC from the autumn of 1907 (if not earlier) – until the spring and
autumn of 1908 (the beginning of the split in the BC)? Did the accuser complain
in the BC about Victor during the period from autumn 1907 to autumn 1908?
Did he hear anything about such complaints? When did he first begin
to complain? When did he first officially speak out with a complaint? Similar questions, accurately clarifying the history
of the case in connection with the history of the split in the BC, will immediately help the commission
to separate in the attacks, reproaches, accusations the element of political malice and factional hysteria.
In conclusion, a brief summary. Victor was chosen as a candidate
for the BC in London by 100 Bolshevik delegates after discussion
of his candidacy by the entire meeting after Victor's departure from the hall for this time. If then no one stated his indecency
(in the sense of behavior unacceptable for a member of the party
etc.) – and no one stated this, then now to recall any old stories, conflicts, reproaches, etc.
is inadmissible. Victor worked as an agent of the BC from 1907 to 1908,
tearing the inheritance from Andrikanis with his teeth, and for a whole year
no one, despite all the malice against such a fiery fighter, dared
to accuse him publicly or before the collegium of "indecency."

From the spring of 1908, Viktor worked as a member of the BC — until August 1908 he "reconciled" us with Maximov, — after August 1908 he helped us conduct the struggle against Maximov and Co., and on the basis of this war, clouds of accusations grew against him.
We repeat once again: on the accusation of provocation, we do not allow ourselves to put forward our personal conviction, because the cases of Azef 14, Barit 15, etc., showed that a precise analysis of evidence is needed here, if it exists, and not personal "convictions."
On the accusation of "dishonesty," we take upon ourselves the full defense of Viktor, ask that we be judged together, and protest against the admission of persons embittered by the struggle with Viktor as "witnesses."

Members of the former BC
N. Lenin
Grigory 16
Innokentiev 17

1 V., Viktor — V. K. Taratuta — member of the RSDLP since 1898, a Bolshevik. After the revolution of 1905-1907, he emigrated abroad. He was a member and secretary of the Foreign Bureau of the Central Committee of the RSDLP, a financial agent of the Bolshevik Center.
2 The Investigative Commission was appointed by the January Plenum of the Central Committee of the RSDLP in 1910 in connection with rumors that spread in 1906 about V. K. Taratuta's involvement in provocation. Having investigated this case, the investigative commission unanimously decided, in view of the absence of any data for accusation, to close the case and restore Taratuta to the rights of a party member.
3 Maximov — A. Bogdanov (A. A. Malinovsky) — a social democrat. After the II Congress of the RSDLP, he joined the Bolsheviks. During the years of reaction and the new revolutionary upsurge, he headed the recallists, and was the leader of the anti-party group "Forward." At the Meeting of the Extended Editorial Board of the newspaper "Proletary" in June 1909, Bogdanov was expelled from the Bolshevik party.
4 M. A. Natanson — a representative of revolutionary populism, later an SR. He was a member of the Central Committee of the SR party. During the World Imperialist War, he held an inconsistent internationalist position, showing vacillation towards centrism.
"Citizen Ivanovich" — A. M. Ignatiev — member of the RSDLP since 1903. Participant in the revolution of 1905-1907, was part of the combat technical group under the Central Committee of the RSDLP. In 1908, at the suggestion of the Central Committee of the RSDLP, he entered into a fictitious marriage with the sister of N. P. Schmidt — El. P. Schmidt, in order to ensure the immediate transfer of part of the inheritance received by her after the death of N. P. Schmidt, to the Bolshevik party.
N. A. Andrikanis — was in the RSDLP from 1903 to 1907; husband of Ek. P. Schmidt. Participant in the revolution of 1905-1907. From 1908 to 1916 he was in political emigration, then returned to Russia with his family. During the years of Soviet power, he was a legal advisor in Moscow.

The Bolshevik Center is the highest body of the Bolshevik faction, headed by V. I. Lenin, elected by the Bolshevik delegates of the V (London) Congress of the RSDLP in 1907.

Nikitich — L. B. Krasin — a social democrat, after the II Congress of the RSDLP — a Bolshevik. At the V (London) Congress, he was elected a candidate member of the Central Committee of the RSDLP. He was in charge of the party treasury and technology; he was a member of the Bolshevik Center. In 1908 he emigrated abroad. During the years
2*

of reaction, he was for some time a member of the recallist group "Forward." After the October Socialist Revolution, he was in diplomatic work, then — People's Commissar of Foreign Trade.
7 It is about the inheritance bequeathed by N. P. Schmidt to the Bolshevik party.
N. P. Schmidt — owner of a furniture factory in Moscow. In his views, he adhered to the Bolsheviks, and took an active part in the first Russian revolution. On the eve of the December armed uprising

in Moscow, he purchased a large quantity of weapons at his own expense for the militiamen of his factory. He repeatedly transferred money to the Moscow Committee of the RSDLP for arming workers. During the days of the uprising in Presnya, Schmidt's factory was destroyed by tsarist troops, and he himself was arrested, imprisoned in Butyrka prison, and brutally killed. Shortly before his death, Nikolai Pavlovich passed on the will that he bequeaths his property to the Bolsheviks. The total amount of N. P. Schmidt's capital was 257 thousand 966 rubles 70 kopecks, not counting the property part of the inheritance — furniture, books, etc. (the issue of the transfer of N. P. Schmidt's inheritance to the Bolshevik party is covered in detail in the work "Statement of the Case. Origin of the Disputed Money" — see this collection, pp. 66-71).
8 Ek. P. Schmidt-Andrikans — member of the party since year; sister of N. P. Schmidt. According to her brother's will, certified by a notary of Butyrka prison, she was authorized to take over the management and administration of all his affairs and all property belonging to him, and to make all kinds of payments. At the same time, N. P. Schmidt expressed his will to her, in case of his death, to transfer the remaining capital to the Bolshevik party. In 1908-1909, Ekaterina Pavlovna fulfilled the will of her brother, and transferred the money to the Bolsheviks. Until the end of her life (1941), she was a member of the CPSU and took an active part in the public life of the country.
9 It is about the arbitration on the case of the inheritance of N. P. Schmidt, held in Paris on December 17 (n.s.) 1907 and May 31 — I, 4-7 June (n.s.) 1908. According to the decision of the arbitration court, Ek. P. Schmidt-Andrikans, who received half of the inheritance of N. P. Schmidt, transferred the money to the Bolsheviks. "The conflict was resolved," wrote V. I. Lenin later (see this collection, p. 66).
10 V.'s wife — El. P. Schmidt — younger sister of N. P. Schmidt. In 1908 she entered into a fictitious marriage with A. M. Ignatiev to receive the share of the inheritance belonging to her. She was actually the wife of V. K. Tara-tuta. She transferred half of the inheritance of her brother bequeathed to her to the Bolshevik party.
11 "Proletary" — a Bolshevik illegal newspaper. It was published from August 21 (September 3) 1906 to November 28 (December II) 1909 under the editorship of V. I. Lenin. The newspaper was published first in Russia, and then abroad. In fact, it was the Central Organ of the Bolsheviks.
12 It is about the Meeting of the Extended Editorial Board of "Proletary", held in Paris on June 21-30 (n.s.) 1909. It was in fact a plenary session of the Bolshevik Center.
The Meeting decisively condemned recallism-ultimatumism as a harmful and dangerous trend within the labor movement, and after Maximov (Bogdanov) refused to submit to the decisions of the Meeting and implement them, it expelled him from the ranks of the Bolsheviks. The Meeting also adopted a decision "On the Reorganization of the Bolshevik Center" (see the decisions of the Meeting in the book "The CPSU in Resolutions and Decisions of Congresses, Conferences and Plenums of the Central Committee," 1970, vol. 1, pp. 265-287).
13 Refers to the plenum of the Central Committee of the RSDLP, held in Paris on January 15 - February 5 (n.s.) 1910. The protocols of the plenum have not been found.