Date: 1908
Source: ru:PSS/v48

Source: PSS, Volume 48

16/XII.

Dear Friend, we have received all of your letters—most recently the one concerning your compatriot’s “compliance” regarding No. 16… though we remain skeptical about that! We are writing to you in response. Could it be that our letters are simply getting lost?

1) For heaven’s sake, take the most vigorous measures to wrest W.** from Krass and formally transfer it in name to Muranov, No. 5—and above all, seize the cash box and the subscription funds. Without this, we are doomed. To allow the “Panama scheme” to go unchecked would be nothing short of criminal.

2) Arrange a meeting for all six of them, ensuring they do not slip away. Time is now running out; they will have ample opportunity to act after the meeting as well.

3) It is absolutely essential that the six of you step forward in W. (in the worst case, even just five—but we can no longer delay or wait).

4) Finally, teach Shibayev*** and all his colleagues to write to us twice a week, with conscientious and thorough correspondence. Without this, it is impossible to work together effectively.

5) The same goes for Vetrov. He has not written a single word—not even once—yet he could easily have drafted and submitted the text of a liquidationist declaration. This is utterly unforgivable.

6) Have you received the draft resolutions for Mishina’s Collegium? Do everything in your power to advance them.

The letters were sent primarily to the bank. The leaflet draft was sent to another of Shibayev’s addresses. Please reply immediately—even if only with a few words—confirming whether you have received this letter.

Best regards.

P.S. We have just learned of the defeat.

We must pass a resolution in Mishina’s Collegium opposing the resolution previously adopted by No. 3, adding that the faction’s decision represents the views of seven half‑party members—and then carry this resolution out across the various districts. Even if the vile resolution passed by the seven Mensheviks in favor of Jagello (and the Bund) does not finally win over No. 6 to our side, we must still step forward in W. as a group of five, speaking ever more sharply and resolutely.

If the resolution on Jagello was adopted under conditions where Rusanov had not yet arrived—or where there was no reliable information about his whereabouts*—then the seven simply deceived No. 6, stealing their handkerchief right out of their pocket. Were I in Rusanov’s place, and were I to arrive later, I would never join the Social Democratic faction; instead, I would raise an earth‑shaking scandal.

But if it is known that Rusanov is not a Social Democrat, then we cannot greet such a treacherous resolution with goodwill.

In any case, I would advise the Central Committee to adopt a resolution along these lines:
(Reiterate the resolution already held by No. 3.)

The Central Committee firmly condemns the resolution put forward by the seven members of the Duma faction who: a) failed to gather accurate data on the Social Democratic workers in Warsaw; b) omitted from the resolution any mention of the protest lodged by all Polish Social Democrats against Jagello; c) neglected to include reference to two (out of three) electors representing the workers of Warsaw; d) portrayed the bourgeois vote for the PPS as a “growing consciousness within the bourgeois milieu”—whereas

* —not being a Social Democrat. Ed.