The creation of the St. Petersburg "Union of Struggle for the Emancipation of the Working Class" was a significant milestone in the history of the Russian liberation movement. The beginning of the formation of the "Union" dates back to the autumn of 1893, when V. I. Ulyanov appeared in the Marxist youth circle, which consisted mainly of students of the Technological Institute. Great erudition in matters of revolutionary theory, creative application of the Marxist method to the analysis of Russia's economic development, and organizational talent gave the 23-year-old Vladimir Ilyich a high reputation among his new comrades.

Lenin saw an indissoluble link between theoretical work and the creation of the Marxist party, the justification of its program and tactics. 1 Lenin had a decisive influence on the further activities of the members of the circle (the so-called old men), its gradual transformation into the core of a citywide revolutionary organization, into the central group of the future "Union of Struggle". Although the activities of the St. Petersburg Union of Struggle for the Emancipation of the Working Class have been studied in more detail before the December arrests of 1895 than in a later period, some aspects of its formation need further research and clarification.

For the problem under consideration, it is fundamentally important to find out how to determine the boundary that separates the existence of a disparate network of circles from the formation of a citywide organization, in other words, what is meant by the association of circles. Based on the practical experience of the St. Petersburg "Union of Struggle," Lenin gave an exhaustive assessment of this a few years later: "If we' unite 'individual - say, district-circles of a single city, then this requires common institutions, i.e., not just a common title of the 'union,' but really common work, the exchange of material,the exchange of ideas, and the exchange of ideas." with their experience and resources, the distribution of functions is no longer limited to districts, but to the specialties of all urban activities " 2 . Consequently, the decision to establish a Center, district groups, and other groups responsible for common work, and their elections, should probably be considered the time when the social-democratic organization is formed, after which the general work begins. But when was this decision made? The opinion that has been established in the literature about the time of the organization of the "Union of Struggle for the Emancipation of the Working Class" - November 1895-is not indisputable. What are the origins of this date? Let's turn to pre-revolutionary publications.

In the report of the delegation of Russian social-Democracy to the Fourth Congress of the Second International (London, 1896), the time of the formation of the "Union of Struggle" is called "autumn of 1895"3, without specifying a more precise date. This is also repeated in the report at the V con-

1 See, for example: Istoriya Kommunisticheskoi partii Sovetskogo Soyuza [History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union], Vol. 1, Moscow, 1964; Kostin A. F. Ot narodnichestvo k marxizmu [From Narodism to Marxism], Moscow, 1967. Lenin-the creator of a new type of party. M. 1980; his own. From Utopia to Science, M. 1984; Khoros V. G. Narodnik ideology and Marxism, M. 1972; Marxism-Leninism and St. Petersburg Workers, L. 1977; Lenin and the "Union of Struggle", M. 1978; Bondarevskaya T. P., Velikanova A. Ya., Suslova F. M. Lenin in Petersburg and Petrograd. L. 1980; Proletarsky Prologue, L. 1983; and others.

2 Lenin V. I. PSS. Vol. 6, p. 168.

3 Report of representatives of the Russian social-Democratic delegation to the International Workers ' Socialist Congress in London. Geneva. 1896, p. 4.

page 95

Gresset of the Second International (Paris, 1900) 4. In the preface to the collection "For 12 Years" (1907), Lenin also referred to the autumn of 1895 as the time of the formation of the"Union of Struggle" 5 . In the article "Tasks of the Russian Social-Democrats", he wrote:: The "Union of Struggle" was founded, as is known, only in 1895/96. " 6 Lenin here considers the creation of the" Union " as a process, i.e., within a broader chronological framework, emphasizing the fact of its formation and strengthening in the work on leading the mass strikes of 1895-1896.

However, in pre-revolutionary publications, another date was also mentioned. Yu. O. Martov writes that "at the end of 1895, the Union of Struggle for the Emancipation of the Working Class stood out from among the scattered social-democratic circles. He also mentions this time in his later works. Martov's recollections of the first meeting with a group of "old men", of the meeting at which he and his comrades were accepted into the organization 7, became the source of the version in Soviet historical literature that it was at this meeting that the "Union of Struggle for the Liberation of the Working Class"was allegedly founded. For the first time the story about this collection was reproduced by V. I. Nevsky in 1923 with reference to the memoirs of Martov 8 . In 1924, in one of the first biographies of Lenin, E. M. Yaroslavsky names a more definite date for the formation of the "Union" - September (i.e., after Lenin's arrival from abroad). Is there a document behind it? Did the author consult with N. K. Krupskaya and other Lenin associates in the Union of Struggle, many of whom were then living in Moscow? This has not yet been clarified. In other publications of Lenin's biography, this date was not repeated. In the History of the CPSU(b), edited by E. M. Yaroslavsky, it is said that "the organization was finally formed in the autumn"; otherwise, the emergence of the" Union of Struggle " is outlined in the same way as in Nevsky, only without reference to the source .9
Thus, in the 1920s, the opinion was established in the historical literature (according to Martov) that at the joint meeting of the Lenin group ("starikov") and the Martov group, a Center of five people was elected (V. I. Lenin, G. M. Krzhizhanovsky, V. V. Starkov, A. A. Vaneev and Yu. O. Martov). district groups were created, and responsibilities were distributed among the other members of the Central Group. This version was maintained until the mid-50s. For the first time in 1956, S. N. Valk wrote differently about the meeting that founded the "Union of Struggle". The source was the memoirs of I. K. Krupskaya, published in 1933 in the collection "Let's learn to work with Lenin". "In the autumn of 1895, three people joined the newly formed Center of the organization: V. I. Lenin, G. M. Krzhizhanovsky and V. V. Starkov," district groups were created, and so on, 10 he wrote. This means that Krupskaya and Martov wrote about different meetings, and the "Union of Struggle" is based not on the joint meeting that Martov described, but on an earlier one, where the "troika"was elected. We have previously written about the time of this meeting as follows:"In October or November 1895, somewhat earlier than the meeting called the united one." 11 The results of the research work on the "Union of Struggle" were summed up in vol. 1 of the multi-volume history of the CPSU 12 .

A reason to return to the history of the formation of the "Union" in connection with the clarification of the date

4 Report on the Russian social-democratic movement to the International Socialist Congress in Paris in 1900, Geneva. 1901, p. 21.

5 See Lenin V. I. PSS. Vol. 16, p. 97.

6 Ibid., vol. 2, p. 460.

7 Martov Yu. Proletarskaya borba v Rossii [Proletarian Struggle in Russia], St. Petersburg, 1906, p. 94. Development of large-scale industry and the labor movement in Russia. Pg. - M. 1923, p. 121; his. Notes of a Social Democrat, Moscow, 1924, p. 180.

8 Nevsky V. Essays on the history of the Russian Communist Party Ch. 1 Pg. 1923, p. 369.

9 Yaroslavsky E. M. Zhizn i rabota V. I. Lenina [Life and Work of V. I. Lenin], Moscow, 1924, p. 44; Istoriya VKP(b), Vol. 1, Moscow, 1926, p. 133.

10 Valk S. N. Social movement in St. Petersburg in the 90s and early 900s. Lenin's "Union of Struggle for the Emancipation of the Working Class". In: Essays on the History of Leningrad, 1895-1917, vol. 3. Moscow-L., 1956, p. 170.

11 Suslova F. M. On the history of the formation of the St. Petersburg "Union of Struggle for the Liberation of the Working Class". - Questions of the history of the CPSU, 1964, N 2, p. 93.

12 Istoriya Kommunisticheskoi partii Sovetskogo Soyuza [History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union], vol. 1, pp. 222-225.

page 96

Its foundation was given by: M. S. Volin. He drew attention to the fact that in the leaflet "To All Petersburg Workers" of September 15(27), 1896, published by the "Union of Struggle", it was noted: "The Union of Struggle for the Emancipation of the Working Class is entering its second year of existence." As Volin wrote, "no leaflets celebrating the anniversary of the formation of the Union of Struggle appeared either in October or November. Perhaps the meeting at which the citywide organization was formed and its governing center was chosen did not take place at the end of October, but in the middle of September 1895. " 13 However, it is known that none of the members of the Central Social-Democratic Group ("starikov") were in St. Petersburg at that time. The author of the leaflet, B. I. Gorev, appeared on the periphery of the organization in November 1895. In addition, K. M. Takhtarev, who participated in the discussion of the text of the leaflet, had close friends among the "old people", attended workers ' circles outside the Nevsky outpost and, consequently, had the opportunity to learn about the meeting that founded the citywide organization, did not report anything about it in his memoirs .14 Volin's statement about the time of registration of the organization, which later became known as the Union of Struggle for the Emancipation of the Working Class, attracted the attention of 15 . It was necessary to revisit the source analysis and take a closer look at the organization's folding process.

The St. Petersburg Social-Democratic group, relying on the workers ' asset, expanded its ties with the workers and formed a new network of circles during the autumn of 1894 and winter of 1895. There is a well-known description of the St. Petersburg organization of 1895, which Lenin gave in terms of the article " 1895 and 1905 (A Small parallel)": "10-16 people (committee). 20-30 working circles. 100-150 maximum links. "Readings". Self-education is a nail"; " Then only mugs. Barely the first beginning of mass agitation " 16 . This characteristic dates back to the beginning of 1895. It was at the end of December 1894 - February 1895 that the first leaflets were compiled and distributed at the Semyannikov Plant and in the St. Petersburg port. By that time, the capital's social-democratic organization was already significant. Its "two-story" structure - committee and circles-remained in place until the fall of 1895.

By the spring of the same year, the connections of the Central Social-Democratic Group had noticeably expanded. "A reorganization was carried out in our group with a more precise division of functions and areas of work," M. A. Silvin wrote in his memoirs, which are the main source of information about the state of affairs in the St. Petersburg social - democratic organization at that time....The network of circles in the districts grew, the organization already embraced a fairly wide circle of both workers and intellectuals. The question was raised of merging, if possible," all the social-democratic groups of St. Petersburg. On April 2, 1895, a meeting was held in Tsarskoye Selo, which was attended by Lenin, Krupskaya, Sylvin, Starkov, P. K. Zaporozhets, A. L. Malchenko, and A. A. Yakubova. "Everyone, starting with Vladimir Ilyich, reported here data on their connections with circles and individual workers, turnouts and addresses, ways of communicating with technicians, with the most active employees on the periphery, and so on," Sylvin said. During the discussion of the further work plan, at Lenin's suggestion, clear principles of organization were outlined, which were put into practice later than 17, vol. E. in the autumn of 1895. "Everyone," Krupskaya recalled, "was assigned to a certain area, which he studied, in which he led circles." 18
The memoirs of Sylvin and Krupskaya make it clear that Lenin in the spring of 1895

13 Volin M. S. What the leaflet catalog tells us. - Questions of the history of the CPSU, 1979, N 6, pp. 122-123.

14 Takhtarev K. M. Rabochoe dvizhenie v Peterburg [Working class movement in St. Petersburg]. 1893-1901. l. 1924, pp. 80-81. On the circumstances of the leaflet's release, see: Gorev B. I. From the Party Past, l. 1924, p. 28.

15 V. I. Lenin and the St. Petersburg Workers, 1893-1924. l. 1982, p. 59.

16 Lenin V. I. PSS. Vol. 9, p. 396.

17 Sylvin M. A. Lenin in the period of the Party's Origin, Moscow, 1958, pp. 96, 97.

18 Krupskaya N. K. Lenin as a Party organizer. In: N. K. Krupskaya on Lenin. Collection of Articles and protrusions, Moscow, 1971, p. 102.

page 97

He insisted on a clearer division of the members of the Central Social-Democratic Group into districts, and on the creation of an organization in St. Petersburg that could lead the strike struggle of the workers. The first step would have been taken in the capital, and then a proletarian party could have been created in Russia. In 1902. Vladimir Ilyich wrote:: "I worked in a circle that set itself very broad, all-encompassing tasks - and all of us, the members of this circle, had to suffer painfully, painfully, from the consciousness that we were turning out to be handicraftsmen at such a historical moment when it would be possible, to modify a well-known saying, to say: give us an organization of revolutionaries - and we will turn Russia upside down! " 19 .

Lenin's attention to improving the structure of the St. Petersburg organization was motivated by the need for further development of the social-democratic and labor movement. "Letter to a Comrade on Our Organizational Tasks", written in September 1902, is an important source for studying the history of the formation of the St. Petersburg social-Democratic organization, since it reflects Lenin's accumulated experience in building the St. Petersburg "Union of Struggle". It provides a key to understanding the circumstances surrounding the emergence of the" troika " (Lenin, Krzhizhanovsky, Starkov) in the Central Group of Social Democrats, which actually served as a committee until the autumn of 1895. "If it turned out that there were quite a lot of members and it was dangerous for them to gather often, then it might be necessary to allocate a special, very small (say, five people, or even less) administrative group from the committee." At the same time, Lenin emphasized that such a group should include in its composition persons "most capable of being practical managers of the entire work as a whole."20 So it turned out with the formation of the "troika". At first, no one chose it, it developed as an informal Center, because the full Central Group was not efficient in its work, the general meetings of such a group (14 people) were unsafe and could not be frequent. Formally, until the autumn of 1895, the Troika was an administrative group, accountable to the Central Group (committee).

When did the Center of Lenin, Starkov, and Krzhizhanovsky come into being? The only exact and earliest date of the troika's operation is found in Krzhizhanovsky's letter to the editorial office of the journal "Annals of Marxism". In response to the question who was the author of the preserved leaflet "To the workers of the Semyannikov Plant", he wrote that he remembered with great effort that the leaflet was written by him and was, in his words, "approved by our then underground methods, the center of our group, consisting of V. I. Ulyanov, Starkov and me" 21. The date of distribution of this leaflet is known-February 21, 1895. In the spring, before going abroad, Lenin agreed with Starkov and Krzhizhanovsky on the need to hire new reliable safe houses to activate work in the districts.

Attaching great importance to centralized leadership, considering that the unifying role can only be performed by a narrow board, Lenin saw the primary task in establishing the work of district groups. He wrote: "I think that district groups should be mainly intermediaries between committees and factories, intermediaries and even mostly transmitters. It should be their main task to ensure that the literature obtained from the committee is properly distributed in secret... To arrange and organize the rapid and correct transmission of literature, leaflets, proclamations, etc., and to train a whole network of agents to do so, means to do more than half the work of preparing for future demonstrations or insurrections. At the moment of excitement, strikes, and ferment, it is too late to arrange the distribution of literature - you can only gradually get used to it."22 These words reflected the Petersburg experience. In the proclamation "To the St. Petersburg Workers and Socialists from the Union of Struggle", first published in 1898 in the same city-

19 Lenin V. I. PSS. Vol. 6, p. 127.

20 Ibid., vol. 7, p. 10.

21 Krzhizhanovsky G. M. Letter to the editor. - Annals of Marxism, 1927, N 4, p. 140.

22 Lenin V. I. PSS. Vol. 7, pp. 12-13.

page 98

As an appendix to the pamphlet "The Tasks of the Russian Social-Democrats", Lenin emphasized:: "Without strengthening and developing revolutionary discipline, organization, and conspiracy, the struggle against the government is impossible. And conspiracy, first of all, requires the specialization of individual circles and individuals in certain functions of work."23 Lenin first began to implement ideas about the role of the center (always narrow), district groups, strengthening revolutionary discipline, conspiracy and specialization in the construction of the St. Petersburg "Union of Struggle".

The needs of the development of the social-democratic movement in Russia and the creation of the proletarian party were met by Lenin's trip abroad (spring - summer 1895), familiarization with the Western European labor movement, meetings with the Emancipation of Labor group, and an agreement reached to publish the collection Worker abroad. In September 1895, Lenin returned to St. Petersburg. According to the official report of the security department to the Police Department, this happened on September 29. The date of Lenin's arrival in St. Petersburg is directly related to the question of the time of the meeting that founded the Union of Struggle.

It was generally assumed that after moving across the border on September 7, Lenin visited Vilna, Moscow, and Orekhovo-Zuyevo without visiting St. Petersburg, where he met with members of local social-democratic groups and agreed to support the publication of the collection "Worker"24 . There are arguments that prove that Lenin arrived in St. Petersburg from Vilna on September 8, 1895, and only then went to Moscow and Orekhovo-Zuyevo . A. I. Ulyanova recalled this: "On his return from abroad, Vladimir Ilyich visited us in Moscow and talked a lot about his trip and conversations, he was especially happy and lively. I would even say - shining. The latter was mainly due to luck at the border with the transportation of illegal literature." The fact that the officials did not detain him after tapping on the double bottom of a suitcase filled with illegal literature, and "he handed over the suitcase in St. Petersburg, where the latter was just as safely gutted, put him in a great mood, with which he came to us in Moscow" 26 . Sylvin's memoirs, published in 1934, stated: "Vladimir Ilyich returned from abroad in early September." In his book of the 50s, in an identical text, the words "at the beginning" are omitted27: this was obviously influenced by the documentary data on Lenin's return to St. Petersburg on September 29.

In the case of the director of the Police Department, addressed to the head of the St. Petersburg provincial Gendarme Department, compiled on the basis of agent data, the time of Lenin's arrival in St. Petersburg is attributed to the beginning of September: "Shortly after the meeting described (it took place during the collective trip of the Social Democrats on a steamer; the date-September 3 - was established according to a receipt found during searches. - F. S.) Ulyanovsk returned from abroad." The police attributed his return to the appearance in workers ' circles of "significant numbers of foreign revolutionary publications." 28 Further, the director of the Police Department reported, on the basis of observation data, to the gendarme department: "On September 30, after leaving the apartment in civilian clothes, with his cap pulled down and the lower part of his face hidden in the collar of his raincoat, he (A. A. Vaneev - F. S.) went to see Nazvanov... At the same time, Ulyanov also approached the house where Namanov lives, but without entering the house, he soon left. " 29 In the final section

23 Ibid., vol. 2, p. 468.

24 Vladimir Ilyich Lenin. Biografiya, Vol. 1, Moscow, 1985, pp. 40-41.

25 Rubanov S. A. The fate of the yellow suitcase. - Leningradskaya pravda, 29. IX. 1985.

26 Ulyanova-Elizarova A. I. Memoirs of Ilyich In the book: Memoirs of V. I. Lenin, vol. 1, pp. 42-43.

27 Silvin M. A. V. I. Lenin in the era of the Party's birth. - Hard labor and exile, 1934, N 1 (110), p. 101; his. Lenin during the Birth of the Party, p. 99.

28 Krasny archiv, 1934, N 1 (62), p. 89 (publication from TsGAOR of the USSR, f. DP, 7 d-vo, 1895, d. 339, ll. 1-6); see also: V. Fedorova. K istorii peterburgskogo kruzhka sotsial ' - demokratov 1894-1895 gg. - Krasnaya letopis, 1925, N 2 (13), pp. 194-195 (publication from the Central State Academy of Education of the USSR, f. DP, 3 d-vo, 1895, d. 684).

29 Krasnaya letopis, 1925, N 2 (13), p. 196; Krasny archiv, 1934, N 1 (62), p.89-90.

page 99

A document drawn up after the investigation of the social-democratic circles case, when a police agent and a police supervisor were questioned as witnesses, states: "On September 17, 1895, Anatoly Vaneyev, the accused at this inquiry, came to the accused Mikhail Nazvanov... At the same time, the accused Vladimir Ulyanov also approached the house where Namianov lived, but soon left without entering the house. " 30
During the interrogation, Lenin gave the investigator evasive answers: "On my return from abroad, I went straight to my mother's house in Moscow, and from there, on the 20th of September, I arrived in St. Petersburg and settled in Tairov Pereulok, house N 44/6, sq." N 30. I moved my things to my apartment from the train station. I don't remember whether I found this apartment on the day of my arrival or a few days later. It seems to me that I haven't been to St. Petersburg yet on the 17th, but I can't give a positive answer about numbers beyond the above"31 . Thus, Lenin returned to St. Petersburg from Moscow before the Police Department became aware of it. Lenin said: "on the 20th of September," but did not categorically deny it on September 17. All this makes it possible to answer in the affirmative the question raised by Volin about the possibility of holding the meeting that founded the "Union of Struggle" in September.

The first (1920) and most laconic source of information about this meeting is the memoirs of Z. P. Nevzorova: "Since the autumn of 1895, the question of the proper organization of our work and the publication of a permanent organ was first raised. All of us were divided into districts, each taking on a job at a particular factory. In the center of the organization was the editorial board of the magazine, consisting of V. I. Ulyanov, G. Krzhizhanovsky, V. Starkov (the memoirists called the collection "Worker" and the newspaper "Rabocheye Delo" - F. S.). Ulyanov, Krzhizhanovsky and Krupskaya worked behind the Neva outpost, Starkov and Zaporozhets - behind Narva, Yakubova, ya., Silvin, Vaneev - on Vasilyevsky Island. I don't remember the distribution of the others. " 32 It is known that S. I. Radchenko was entrusted with relations with other groups, technical and financial affairs of the organization. A. L. Malchenko was appointed his assistant.

Krupskaya has another page of memoirs: "The organization was growing, it was necessary to formalize it. They chose the top three (Lenin, Krzhizhanovsky, Starkov), which was to become an organizational and literary center, to which each district had to report in detail in its work on a certain day every week. All districts were supposed to meet together no more than once a month. Everyone accepted this new organization, but Stepan Ivanovich Radchenko, a major organizer of student circles, who was used to decent "unity of command", found himself outside the top three, became agitated and began to prove to the "district" public that with such an organization, "districts" are simple performers, and not workmates, that they will all work together. completely disunited and deprived of participation in the common work, which will be entirely in the hands of the troika, and so on and so forth, the "Districts" became agitated. The transition from "comrades" to "performers" was particularly offensive - this was seen as an act of distrust. It was decided to protest this attitude of the troika. The meeting was held at Stepan Ivanovich's, and the protest was read to the surprised troika. Ilyich responded with a heated speech in which he argued that "primitive democracy" was impossible under Russian conditions, spoke of the need for organization, and said that such organization was caused by the needs of the cause, and not by distrust of the state.-

30 Report on the case of criminal circles formed in St. Petersburg in 1894-1895 by persons calling themselves "social-democrats". In: Lenin N. (Ulyanov V.). Sobr. soch. Vol. 1. Moscow, 1924, p. 600. The report is a reprint of " Conclusions on the further direction of the investigation into criminal circles of persons calling themselves "Social Democrats" that have emerged in St. Petersburg (TSAOR USSR, f. 124, op. 4, 1895, d. 1).

31 Krasny archiv, 1934, N 1 (62), p. 98.

32 Nevzorova-Krzhizhanovskaya Z. P. Sketches of memoirs about the "Union of Struggle for the Liberation of the Working Class". In: The First Congress of the RSDLP, Moscow, 1958, p. 136. This article was first published in 1920 in the magazine "Creativity", N 7-10.

page 100

mu-either. The audience calmed down. " 33 It was this text that Krupskaya quoted from Valk, who emphasized that this meeting marked the beginning of a new type of proletarian organization. 34
If we compare the recollections of Nevzorova and Krupskaya, the idea arises that Krupskaya is not talking about one, but about two meetings: at the first one, a decision was made on the election of the "troika", the creation of district groups, etc. The text before the words "everyone accepted this new organization" actually coincides with what Nevzorova said. Apparently, the new structure of the organization was approved at the first meeting without any friction. This was not unexpected, because the agreement in principle on the necessary changes to be made to the organization was reached in the spring. Radchenko started his conversations with the "district public", i.e. with members of already working district groups, after the first meeting, so the protest was read to troika at another meeting, which took place later. If the prehistory of the second meeting is described by Krupskaya from the words of Nevzorova as a member of the district group of the Zarechnaya part of St. Petersburg, then Krupskaya told about Lenin's speech at this meeting from his own words: "That evening (after the meeting. S.) Ilyich came to tell me about this incident that had disturbed him, said that the misunderstanding that had arisen was extremely characteristic, and obviously repeated to me the heated speech he had just made. " 35
Vladimir Ilyich, completely absorbed in creating a combat-ready, conspiratorial organization, was completely alien to considerations that were far from the interests of the cause. This episode made such a strong impression on him that a quarter of a century later, in his work The Infantile Disease of Leftism in Communism, referring to this particular clash, he wrote: "There have always been attacks on the' dictatorship of leaders ' in our party. there was no party yet, but the central group in St. Petersburg began to take shape and had to take over the leadership of the district groups. " 36 This speech against centralism reflected the clash between the newly born partisanship and the inertia of the circle movement. "Anyone who has worked practically in our movement," Lenin wrote, "knows how widespread the 'primitive' view of democracy is among the masses of young students and workers. " 37 The meeting of all districts was an echo of another, at which the "troika" was elected and district groups were formed. The meeting participants understood and accepted Lenin's explanation. Decisions on the new organization structure have been confirmed.

It should be noted that in the historical literature Lenin's words about "attacks on the dictatorship of leaders" are usually attributed to Martov, by analogy with his speeches of this kind after the Second Congress of the RSDLP. However, Krupskaya's memoirs suggest that Lenin's text from the work "The infantile disease of "leftism" in Communism " reflected a certain episode in the history of the Union of Struggle. Martov did not attend this meeting, but was accepted into the organization later.

Thus, it was the first assembly that actually founded the St. Petersburg Union of Struggle for the Emancipation of the Working Class. A new structure of the organization was formed, and the decision of the Central Group consolidated the role of the troika as a governing center, which corresponded to the real significance of this group headed by Lenin and the requirements of the conspiracy. The Center performed organizational functions and carried out ideological leadership of the organization, concentrating literary and editorial work in its hands. On Lenin's initiative, the majority of the members of the Central Group were divided into districts, three district groups were created, and a new link in the structure of the social-democratic organization was created that met the needs of practical work. The Center had representatives in district groups. Information from working circles was received through active district organizers.

33 Krupskaya N. K. Uk. soch., p. 103.

34 Valk S. N. Uk. soch., p. 170.

35 Krupskaya N. K. Uk. soch., p. 103.

36 Lenin V. I. PSS. Vol. 41, p. 28.

37 Ibid., vol. 6, p. 143.

page 101

Let's turn to the police data on the work of the Center ("troika") in the districts. They contain specific dates and allow you to specify the time of the first two meetings. On September 24, Lenin, Krzhizhanovsky, Starkov, and worker I. I. Yakovlev, a district organizer in the Zarechnaya district, discussed some issues at the apartment of Putilov worker B. I. Zinoviev in 38 Ogorodny Lane . 20-year-old Boris Zinoviev was a district organizer of the Moscow-Narva part of St. Petersburg. Here the mood of the workers, the state of agitation and propaganda were clarified, the prospects for the development of the organization and the possibility of creating new circles were determined. Agents of the Okhrana, who were constantly following Lenin, reported to the Police Department: "Ulyanov stayed in the house (86/6 on the 7th line on Vasilyevsky Island, in the safe house of I. V. Fedorov-F. S.) for 3 hours, after which he left there with Gleb Krzhizhanovsky, with whom he went to his home." 39 . During the autumn (from October 1) of 1894 and the winter of 1895, meetings were held there under Lenin's leadership. Outside the Neva outpost, meetings were held in the safe house of N. E. Merkulov, a worker at the Aleksandrovsky Mechanical Plant, where Lenin, Starkov, Krzhizhanovsky and members of the Malchenko and Ya. M. Lyakhovsky district group often visited, and workers I. V. Babushkin and V. A. Shelgunov organized all the work in the district. "The foundations of the' Union of Struggle for the Emancipation of the Working Class ' were laid here," Shelgunov recalled .40
At all meetings held in different districts in the autumn of 1805 in safe houses, there was always a "troika", i.e. the Center of the organization (Lenin, Krzhizhanovsky, Starkov), members of district groups and workers-organizers of districts. Here reports from the districts were heard, information was exchanged between the districts, and the first steps were taken to establish the overall work of the city's social-democratic organization. Materials on the Center's activities in the districts, i.e., on the beginning of the leadership of the Center by district groups, indicate that the second meeting, at which the protest of district groups was read to the troika, took place no earlier than September 24 (apparently, in the first half of October). This is also confirmed by Lenin's words, which directly indicate the time of this meeting - it was then when "the Central Group in St. Petersburg began to take shape and had to take over the leadership of the district groups." 41 Consequently, the meeting that founded the "Union of Struggle" took place earlier than September 24: either immediately after Lenin's return from abroad, or after his return to St. Petersburg from Moscow.

Now the question arises: what meeting did Martov write about in his memoirs, claiming that it was at this meeting that the Union of Struggle was founded? The background to this, in fact, different meeting is as follows: the 22-year-old Martov (formerly a member of a Marxist circle called the "Petersburg Group for the Emancipation of Labor"), who had two years 'experience working in social-democratic workers' circles in Vilna, returned to St. Petersburg in early October 1895. His friends S. A. Hoffman and V. M. Trenyukhin were " disappointed, "as he wrote, in their attempts to" form their own social-democratic organization, "considered it necessary to enter into negotiations with the" old men " as the most influential social-democratic group in the capital, and expected Martov's arrival. Martov's comrade Lyakhovsky, a member of the social-democratic movement in Kiev, who since 1895 had been working as a propagandist with the "old men" behind the Neva Outpost, brought Martov to Krzhizhanovsky on Khersonskaya Street. There, on behalf of the" old men", in addition to the owner of the apartment, Lenin and Starkov, that is, the entire" troika", conversed with him on behalf of the "old men", the existence of which, as follows from the context of Martov's memoirs, the latter did not even guess. A few more meetings with Lenin in the Public Library; another meeting with Krzyzanowski and Starkov; "after that, the merger of our two groups into one common organization was practically carried out," Martov wrote .42
38 Report on the case of... circles, p. 570.

39 Red Archive, 1934, vol. 1 (62), p. 90.

40 Shelgunov V. A. Vladimir Ilyich in Petersburg. In: At the beginning of the Road, L. 1975, p. 349.

41 Lenin V. I. PSS. Vol. 41, p. 28.

42 Martov Yu. Notes of a Social Democrat, pp. 261-273.

page 102

This, however, was not a merger of the two organizations. Martov's group had no support in the workers ' circles. But Lenin considered it necessary to unite even disparate Marxist groups, and a step was taken towards this. Those whom Martov calls his group are named by him by name: Hoffman, Trenyukhin, Lyakhovsky. It was they who met with the full group of "old men", which apparently happened in late October or early November .43 "The meeting was held at the Radchenko couple's apartment on the Vyborg side," Martov wrote. - In addition to the owners and my friends, it was composed of V. I. Ulyanov, G. M. Krzhizhanovsky, V. V. Starkov, engineer A. L. Malchenko, university students A. A. Vaneev, M. A. Silvin, P. K. Zaporozhets (only M. A. Silvin was a university student - F. S.), teacher N. K. Krupskaya, kursistok A. A. Yakubova and Z. P. Nevzorova and student-technologist Ya. P. Ponomarev. These 17 people formed the organization that marked the first step in turning the ideological trend into a party. " 44 These words exaggerate the significance of the entry of Martov and two of his comrades into the organization. The central social-democratic group of "old men" was formed as the Center of the unification of workers ' Marxist circles long before it was replenished with new members who had no connections among the metropolitan proletariat.

Martov went on to say that it was at this joint meeting that for the first time all the participants were divided into three district groups: "Later we would call them 'district committees'... All work was to be consolidated by the mozhdurayonny center, or bureau, consisting of Krzhizhanovsky, Vaneev, Starkov, Ulyanov, and myself. " 45 From the context of the story about the meeting, it seemed that the Center of the organization was chosen here for the first time. Although it is known that after the election of the "troika" to the Center "after some time... Y was entered. Tsederbarg (Martov), who had recently arrived from Vilna, " wrote Nevzorova 46 . According to Silvin, according to the wish expressed by Vladimir Ilyich, Vaneev was elected as a representative to the Center "from the district group of the Zarechnaya part. At the same time, Yu. O. Martov was co-opted " 47 . So Sylvain wrote in 1933. As a result, the Center really expanded to five people, but this was already its second composition. The evidence given about co-optation proves once again that the assembly that founded the "Union of Struggle for the Emancipation of the Working Class" is not at all the same assembly that Martov described. It is only in Sylvin's book published in 1958 that Martov's version of the role of the united assembly in the formation of the "Union of Struggle" is repeated and the date of this meeting is indicated - the beginning of December 48 .

In this case, how can we explain that Sylvin's memoirs, which are a source of various information about the" Union of Struggle " and Lenin's activities at that time, do not contain information about the very first meetings of the organization in the autumn of 1895, which are known from the memoirs of Nevzorova-Krzhizhanovskaya and Krupskaya? Was Silvin even in St. Petersburg in September-October of that year? The check showed that he received a residence permit in the capital only on October 7, and registered on October 10, 1895. He returned, apparently, from the Samara province, where he spent the summer 49 . Perhaps, of course, he lived in Tsarskoye Selo, as in the spring, but this time without a residence permit, and only occasionally visited St. Petersburg. This can explain the incomplete nature of his memoirs about the formation of the "Union of Struggle", the omission from them of very significant moments in the formation of the organization, and the uncritical reproduction of Martov's version in the 1958 edition.

The organization created under Lenin's leadership, as you know, received its own name.

43 Ibid., p. 277.

44 Ibid., pp. 271-272.

45 Ibid., pp. 274-275.

46 Nevzorova-Krzhizhanovskaya Z. P. Uk. soch., p. 136.

47 Silvin M. A. Anatoly Aleksandrovich Vaneev. - Stary Bolshevik, 1933, N 2 (5), p. 169.

48 Silvin M. A. Lenin in the period of the birth of the Party, pp. 97, 103-104.

49 Kirilina R. A. Funds of the Leningrad Historical Archive as a source of clarification of Leninist addresses in Leningrad. In: Leniniana. Search. Source studies. Archeografiya, L. 1981, p. 370.

page 103

the full name that went down in history after the arrest of Vladimir Ilyich and most of its founders. On December 15, 1895, a leaflet was issued with the title: From the "Union of Struggle for the Emancipation of the Working Class"50 . Martov and Sylvin told about who proposed this name and when. The new organization proved effective during the St. Petersburg strikes of 1895. "We had to have a name, and we had to proclaim it at once," wrote Sylvin, " if we wanted to divert the attention of the investigation department from our arrested comrades."51 . It was important, Martov reported, "to prevent the gendarmes from portraying those arrested as the perpetrators of all the commotion caused by the strikes and leaflets... After various suggestions, they all agreed on mine: to call themselves the "Union of Struggle for the Emancipation of the Working Class." 52 Beth, Martov "just forgot how it was," Sylvin argued, arguing that it was he who suggested the name. Takhtarev also wrote about this, referring to Yakubova, recalling the meeting at which the name of the organization was discussed and the corresponding proposal of Silvin appeared. However, during police interrogations, the Putilov workers N. Danilov and I. Lvov testified that on December 4, 1895 (i.e., before the arrests), at the apartment of the worker Zinoviev (Starkov and Martov participated in this meeting from the Center of the organization), " there was talk that henceforth appeals would be signed on behalf of the Union of Struggle for the Liberation of the Worker class " 53 . Consequently, not after the arrest of the "old men", as Sylvin and Martov wrote, but before the arrest, the organization discussed the need to give the organization a name, and this was decided in principle. The arrests accelerated the implementation of this decision. The decisions of the first September meeting, which approved the new structure of the organization, were aimed at uniting workers ' circles, at establishing clear links between the Center through district groups and circle workers with the factories and factories of St. Petersburg, and at preparing the organization for mass agitation and leadership of the working-class movement. Its meaning is obvious.

The St. Petersburg social-democratic organization created under Lenin's leadership stood the test of the growing strike movement in St. Petersburg, when a wave of strikes took place within a month, starting on November 5, 1895, at the Thornton, La Ferme, Mechanical Shoe Manufacturing, Lebedev, Koenig and Putilov factories. During these strikes, the Union of Struggle switched to systematic mass agitation. The ties between the social-democratic organization and the working class were strengthened and expanded. The authority of the "Union of Struggle"has grown. The December arrests, which dealt a severe blow to the organization, failed to destroy it. The "Union of Struggle" had strong ties with the working-class movement.

Lenin highly appreciated the work of the Union of Struggle as the beginning of a proletarian party in Russia. "Is it possible to deny," he wrote, in particular, " that such an organization, which unites at least the largest centers of the working-class movement in Russia, which has a revolutionary organ and enjoys the same authority among the Russian workers as the Union of Struggle enjoys among the St. Petersburg workers - that such an organization was a revolutionary organization. It would be the biggest political factor in contemporary Russia, a factor that the government could not ignore. " 54 The St. Petersburg Union of Struggle for the Emancipation of the Working Class led the strike struggle of the metropolitan proletariat in the mid-90s of the last century, taught the proletarians Marxism, and initiated the unification of the working-class movement in Russia with scientific socialism. The proletarian stage of the liberation movement began, culminating in the Great October Socialist Revolution.

50 Leaflets of the St. Petersburg "Union of Struggle for the Emancipation of the Working Class", Moscow, 1934, p. 14.

51 Sylvin M. A. Lenin during the Birth of the Party, p. 120.

52 Martov Yu. Notes of a Social Democrat, p. 292.

53 Case report... o kruzhkakh, p. 573; TsGAOR SSSR, f. 102, 7 d-vo, 1895, 339, vol. 2, l. 81 vol.; vol. 3, l. 144 vol.

54 Lenin V. I. PSS. Vol. 2, pp. 460-461.

page 104

Permanent link to this publication: