The manifesto of October 20, 1905, marked the greatest concession that the Tsar could make at that moment. It amounted unquestionably to the proclamation of a constitution ; . . .
Amnesty for political offenders was declared on November 3 by the Government. . . .
In this set of circumstances, Trotsky�s position was significant, since he occupied at the moment the heights commanding the revolutionary struggle. And Trotsky proved himself completely to be a brilliant orator, able to sweep the masses off their feet and carry them with him. But neither then nor later did Trotsky know exactly where to lead them. In 1917 Trotsky followed Lenin. In 1905 his spiritual guide was Parvus, whose real name was Helphand, a Russian Jewish emigrant who was active at the beginning of the twentieth century in the German Social Democratic movement, adhering to its left wing. Parvus felt the exhilaration of the
Russian Revolution of 1905 and illegally returned to Russia together with Trotsky. Parvus advanced the idea of �permanent revolution� which Trotsky seized upon and developed.
Trotsky� conception was as follows: Two types of revolution are taking place in the world—the middle-class and the socialist. They do not coincide with each other, but are related to each other. . . . Russia cannot emerge from the revolutionary process until the socialist revolution has been carried to its end throughout the world.
This advance of the Russian army, for which Kerensky had made preparations, began on July 1 on the southwestern front. During the first few days it developed successfully. The occasion seemed unfavorable for further Bolshevik demonstrations. On July 11, Lenin left for several days' rest in Finland at the cottage of Bonch-Bruevich. But even within this short time the state of political affairs in Petrograd altered so much that there was a division in the Provisional Government.
The grounds for the controversy lay in the question concerning the autonomy of the Ukraine. On July 14 a delegation from the Provisional Government consisting of three Ministers, Tseretelli, Kerensky, and Tereshchenko, concluded in Kiev an agreement with the All-Ukrainian Central Rada, which had been formed there. Upon receiving word of this, the Kadet Ministers quit the Provisional Government, since they held that the question of Ukrainian autonomy could not be settled before the gathering of the Constituent Assembly. Their resignation caused a governmental crisis. The problem of reorganizing the Government arose. The Bolsheviks regarded the moment as favorable for the seizure of power.
Factory meetings and party conferences of Bolsheviks began on July 16. On the morning of the seventeenth Lenin returned hurriedly to Petrograd and took upon himself the direction of the movement. On that same day there occurred great mass demonstrations in
the capital, organized by the Bolsheviks, with such slogans as "Away with the ten capitalist Ministers" — "Peace to the huts, war on the palaces."
Several thousand sailors came from Kronstadt. The troops of the Petrograd garrison either hesitated or definitely went over to the side of the Bolsheviks. Many workers who took part were armed with revolvers. The balance of force was undoubtedly on the side of the Bolsheviks on that day of July 17. But they either did not see how to utilize it or did not want to risk taking the decisive step of arresting the Ministers of the Provisional Government and seizing the official institutions. The entire day passed in street demonstrations, during which there occurred some firing and rioting, in which a number of people were killed and wounded.
On the next day, July 18, the picture changed. The Government called away from the northern front a strong squadron of cavalry. At the same time the mood in several regiments of the Petrograd garrison shifted sharply in favor of the Provisional Government when the Minister of Justice, Pereverzev, published evidence tending to show that Lenin and other Bolshevik leaders were receiving money from the Germans.
The movement of protest was put down. On the following day, July 19, government troops occupied the building held by the Bolshevik Central Committee, the Kshesinskaya Palace, and also the SS. Peter and Paul Fortress. The editorial offices and printing shops of the Pravda were nearly mobbed and wrecked by a band of military cadets. On the same day the Provisional Government issued an order for the arrest of Lenin, Zinoviev, and Trotzky.
7.
Information from the Military Intelligence Bureau, published on July 18, had accused Lenin of receiving funds from Germany through Sweden. The agents and intermediaries indicated by these documents were Parvus, Hanecki, and Kozlowski.
The documents were published at the order of the Minister of Justice, Pereverzev, who was a Menshevik. The actual head of the Government at that moment, Kerensky, who within a few days formally became Premier, considered the publication of the documents a mistake, since it put difficulties in the way of arresting Hanecki, who just at that time had left Stockholm for Petrograd. His arrest, in Kerensky's opinion might have afforded new and incontrovertible evidence of relations between the Bolsheviks and the Germans. Upon hearing of the publication of the facts in possession of the Provisional Government, Hanecki turned back to Stockholm without having reached Russian territory.6
6. Alexander F. Kerensky The Catastrophe (New York and London : D. Appleton & Co., 1927), pp. 229 ff.
As a result of this disagreement with Kerensky, Pereverzev was forced to resign. On the same day, July 18, immediately upon the publication of the information from the Military Intelligence Bureau, Lenin wrote for the new Bolshevik paper Listok Pravdy ("The Handbill of Truth")—the Pravda having been raided at the time—an article asserting that the information was a slanderous invention. Lenin even denied his connection with Hanecki. He wrote at the end of his article:
We would add that both Hanecki and Kozlowski are not Bolsheviks, but members of the Polish Social Democratic party,
that Hanecki is a member of its Central Committee, whom we have known since the London Party Convention of 1903 [ as printed ; should be 1907 ] which the Polish delegates* left. . . . The Bolsheviks have received no money whatsoever either from Hanecki or Kozlowski. That is all a lie
* The "Polish delegates" mentioned by Ioulianoff were the Jew Fürstenberg (alias Ganetsky / Hanecki) and the Jew Kozlovsky (which may have been his real name). The latter was personally known by Kerensky who describes him somewhere in relatively charitable terms.
That 'the Bolsheviks received no money' has been contradicted by practically every source known to be on other counts reliable.
Lenin�s lying denials were re-iterated at a later date by Braunstein a.k.a Bronstein alias Trotzky. All this may be considered as typical of the Marxian / Leninist racket. (WPT, 28 May 05)
Lenin�s efforts to repudiate Hanecki produced an odd impression. Hanecki�s close connection with the Bolsheviks was not open to any doubt. Together with Vorovsky and Radek, he was a member of the Foreign Bureau of the Bolshevik Central Committee in Stockholm. Both at the beginning of the War and of the Revolution, Hanecki rendered valuable services to Lenin and executed instructions from him. Lenin�s assertion that the Bolsheviks received �no money whatsoever� from Hanecki is entirely untrue, for Lenin himself wrote on March 30, 19017, to Hanecki in Stockholm : �In maintaining relations between Petrograd and Stockholm, do not spare funds.�
After the Bolshevik Revolution, it should be further noted, Hanecki served in the Peoples� Commissariat of Foreign Affairs, and later was a member of the Collegium of the Peoples� Commissariat for Foreign Trade of the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics.
So the intimate collaboration of Hanecki and the Bolsheviks cannot be questioned. It is apparent that Lenin�s affirmation—at least the part of it repudiating Hanecki—definitely cannot command any confidence.
As for Parvus, Lenin did not mention him in his statement of July 18, but on July 19 or 20 he wrote in an article which was not printed at the time, �Parvus
is being implicated, in the endeavor by any means to indicate some connection between him and the Bolsheviks.�
Lenin further noted that the Bolsheviks had refused more pointedly than anyone else to have anything to do with Parvus. Concerning the fact that it was Parvus himself who arranged for Lenin�s trip through Germany in the �sealed� railway car, Lenin kept silent.
The connection between Hanecki and Parvus, Lenin could not deny, but he undertook to limit it to merely business relations: �Hanecki carried on commercial affairs, as a member of the staff of a firm in which Parvus was a partner.� Lenin protested against an endeavor by his accusers to mix these commercial relations with politics.
( pages 161 - 165 )
