CHAPTER XXXV

SOCIALIST PROPAGANDA, REVOLUTIONARY AGITATION, AND TERRORISM

Closer Relations with Western Socialism--Attempts to Influence

the Masses--Bakunin and Lavroff--"Going in among the People"--The

Missionaries of Revolutionary Socialism--Distinction between Propaganda

and Agitation--Revolutionary Pamphlets for the Common People--Aims

and Motives of the Propagandists--Failure of Propaganda--Energetic

Repression--Fruitless Attempts at Agitation--Proposal to Combine

with Liberals--Genesis of Terrorism--My Personal Relations with the

Revolutionists--Shadowers and Shadowed--A Series of Terrorist Crimes--A

Revolutionist Congress--Unsuccessful Attempts to Assassinate

the Tsar--Ineffectual Attempt at Conciliation by Loris

Melikof--Assassination of Alexander II.--The Executive Committee

Shows Itself Unpractical--Widespread Indignation and Severe

Repression--Temporary Collapse of the Revolutionary Movement--A New

Revolutionary Movement in Sight.

Count Tolstoy's educational reform had one effect which was not

anticipated: it brought the revolutionists into closer contact with

Western Socialism. Many students, finding their position in Russia

uncomfortable, determined to go abroad and continue their studies in

foreign universities, where they would be free from the inconveniences

of police supervision and Press-censure. Those of the female sex had

an additional motive to emigrate, because they could not complete their

studies in Russia, but they had more difficulty in carrying out

their intention, because parents naturally disliked the idea of their

daughters going abroad to lead a Bohemian life, and they very often

obstinately refused to give their consent. In such cases the persistent

daughter found herself in a dilemma. Though she might run away from

her family and possibly earn her own living, she could not cross

the frontier without a passport, and without the parental sanction a

passport could not be obtained. Of course she might marry and get the

consent of her husband, but most of the young ladies objected to the

trammels of matrimony. Occasionally the problem was solved by means of

a fictitious marriage, and when a young man could not be found to

co-operate voluntarily in the arrangement, the Terrorist methods, which

the revolutionists adopted a few years later for other purposes, might

be employed. I have heard of at least one case in which an ardent female

devotee of medical science threatened to shoot a student who was going

abroad if he did not submit to the matrimonial ceremony and allow her to

accompany him to the frontier as his official wife!

Strange as this story may seem, it contains nothing inherently

improbable. At that time the energetic young ladies of the Nihilist

school were not to be diverted from their purpose by trifling obstacles.

We shall meet some of them hereafter, displaying great courage and

tenacity in revolutionary activity. One of them, for example, attempted

to murder the Prefect of St. Petersburg; and another, a young person of

considerable refinement and great personal charm, gave the signal

for the assassination of Alexander II. and expiated her crime on the

scaffold without the least sign of repentance.

Most of the studious emigres of both sexes went to Zurich, where female

students were admitted to the medical classes. Here they made the

acquaintance of noted Socialists from various countries who had settled

in Switzerland, and being in search of panaceas for social regeneration,

they naturally fell under their influence, at the same time they read

with avidity the works of Proudhon, Lassalle, Buchner, Marx, Flerovski,

Pfeiffer, and other writers of "advanced opinions."

Among the apostles of socialism living at that time in Switzerland they

found a sympathetic fellow-countryman in the famous Anarchist, Bakunin,

who had succeeded in escaping from Siberia. His ideal was the

immediate overthrow of all existing Governments, the destruction of

all administrative organisation, the abolition of all bourgeois

institutions, and the establishment of an entirely new order of things

on the basis of a free federation of productive Communes, in which all

the land should be distributed among those capable of tilling it and the

instruments of production confided to co-operative associations. Efforts

to obtain mere political reforms, even of the most radical type, were

regarded by him with contempt as miserable palliatives, which could be

of no real, permanent benefit to the masses, and might be positively

injurious by prolonging the present era of bourgeois domination.

For the dissemination of these principles a special organ called The

Cause of the People (Narodnoye Dyelo) was founded in Geneva in 1868 and

was smuggled across the Russian frontier in considerable quantities.

It aimed at drawing away the young generation from Academic Nihilism to

more practical revolutionary activity, but it evidently remained to some

extent under the old influences, for it indulged occasionally in very

abstract philosophical disquisitions. In its first number, for example,

it published a programme in which the editors thought it necessary to

declare that they were materialists and atheists, because the belief

in God and a future life, as well as every other kind of idealism,

demoralises the people, inspiring it with mutually contradictory

aspirations, and thereby depriving it of the energy necessary for

the conquest of its natural rights in this world, and the complete

organisation of a free and happy life. At the end of two years this

organ for moralising the people collapsed from want of funds, but other

periodicals and pamphlets were printed, and the clandestine relations

between the exiles in Switzerland and their friends in St. Petersburg

were maintained without difficulty, notwithstanding the efforts of the

police to cut the connection. In this way Young Russia became more and

more saturated with the extreme Socialist theories current in Western

Europe.

Thanks partly to this foreign influence and partly to their own

practical experience, the would-be reformers who remained at home came

to understand that academic talking and discussing could bring about no

serious results. Students alone, however numerous and however devoted to

the cause, could not hope to overthrow or coerce the Government. It was

childish to suppose that the walls of the autocratic Jericho would fall

by the blasts of academic trumpets. Attempts at revolution could not be

successful without the active support of the people, and consequently

the revolutionary agitation must be extended to the masses. So far there

was complete agreement among the revolutionists, but with regard to the

modus operandi emphatic differences of opinion appeared. Those who were

carried away by the stirring accents of Bakunin imagined that if

the masses could only be made to feel themselves the victims of

administrative and economic oppression, they would rise and free

themselves by a united effort. According to this view all that was

required was that popular discontent should be excited and that

precautions should be taken to ensure that the explosions of discontent

should take place simultaneously all over the country. The rest might

safely be left, it was thought, to the operation of natural forces and

the inspiration of the moment. Against this dangerous illusion warning

voices were raised. Lavroff, for example, while agreeing with Bakunin

that mere political reforms were of little or no value, and that any

genuine improvement in the condition of the working classes could

proceed only from economic and social reorganisation, maintained

stoutly that the revolution, to be permanent and beneficial, must be

accomplished, not by demagogues directing the ignorant masses, but by

the people as a whole, after it had been enlightened and instructed as

to its true interests. The preparatory work would necessarily require a

whole generation of educated propagandists, living among the labouring

population rural and urban.

For some time there was a conflict between these two currents of

opinion, but the views of Lavroff, which were simply a practical

development of academic Nihilism, gained far more adherents than the

violent anarchical proposals of Bakunin, and finally the grandiose

scheme of realising gradually the Socialist ideal by indoctrinating the

masses was adopted with enthusiasm. In St. Petersburg, Moscow and other

large towns the student association for mutual instruction, to which

I have referred in the foregoing chapter, became centres of popular

propaganda, and the academic Nihilists were transformed into active

missionaries. Scores of male and female students, impatient to convert

the masses to the gospel of freedom and terrestrial felicity, sought

to get into touch with the common people by settling in the villages as

school-teachers, medical practitioners, midwives, etc., or by working

as common factory hands in the industrial centres. In order to obtain

employment in the factories and conceal their real purpose, they

procured false passports, in which they were described as belonging

to the lower classes; and even those who settled in the villages lived

generally under assumed names. Thus was formed a class of professional

revolutionists, sometimes called the Illegals, who were liable to be

arrested at any moment by the police. As compensation for the privations

and hardships which they had to endure, they had the consolation of

believing that they were advancing the good cause. The means they

usually employed were formal conversations and pamphlets expressly

written for the purpose. The more enthusiastic and persevering of

these missionaries would continue their efforts for months and years,

remaining in communication with the headquarters in the capital or some

provincial town in order to report progress, obtain a fresh supply of

pamphlets, and get their forged passports renewed. This extraordinary

movement was called "going in among the people," and it spread among the

young generation like an epidemic. In 1873 it was suddenly reinforced

by a detachment of fresh recruits. Over a hundred Russian students were

recalled by the Government from Switzerland, in order to save them from

the baneful influence of Bakunin, Lavroff, and other noted Socialists,

and a large proportion of them joined the ranks of the propagandists.*

* Instances of going in among the people had happened as

early as 1864, but they did not become frequent till after

1870.

With regard to the aims and methods of the propagandists, a good deal of

information was obtained in the course of a judicial inquiry instituted

in 1875. A peasant, who was at the same time a factory worker, informed

the police that certain persons were distributing revolutionary

pamphlets among the factory-hands, and as a proof of what he said he

produced some pamphlets which he had himself received. This led to

an investigation, which showed that a number of young men and women,

evidently belonging to the educated classes, were disseminating

revolutionary ideas by means of pamphlets and conversation. Arrests

followed, and it was soon discovered that these agitators belonged to

a large secret association, which had its centre in Moscow and local

branches in Ivanovo, Tula, and Kief. In Ivanovo, for instance--a

manufacturing town about a hundred miles to the northeast of Moscow--the

police found a small apartment inhabited by three young men and four

young women, all of whom, though belonging by birth to the educated

classes, had the appearance of ordinary factory workers, prepared their

own food, did with their own hands all the domestic work, and sought

to avoid everything which could distinguish them from the labouring

population. In the apartment were found 240 copies of revolutionary

pamphlets, a considerable sum of money, a large amount of correspondence

in cypher, and several forged passports.

How many persons the society contained, it is impossible to say, because

a large portion of them eluded the vigilance of the police; but many

were arrested, and ultimately forty-seven were condemned. Of these,

eleven were noble, seven were sons of parish priests, and the remainder

belong to the lower classes--that is to say, the small officials,

burghers, and peasants. The average age of the prisoners was

twenty-four, the oldest being thirty-six and the youngest under

seventeen! Only five or six were over twenty-five, and none of these

were ringleaders. The female element was represented by no less than

fifteen young persons, whose ages were on an average under twenty-two.

Two of these, to judge by their photographs, were of refined,

prepossessing appearance, and seemingly little fitted for taking part in

wholesale massacres such as the society talked of organising.

The character and aims of the society were clearly depicted in the

documentary and oral evidence produced at the trial. According to the

fundamental principles, there should exist among the members absolute

equality, complete mutual responsibility and full frankness and

confidence with regard to the affairs of the association. Among the

conditions of admission we find that the candidate should devote himself

entirely to revolutionary activity; that he should be ready to sever

all ties, whether of friendship or of love, for the good cause; that

he should possess great powers of self-sacrifice and the capacity for

keeping secrets; and that he should consent to become, when necessary,

a common labourer in a factory. The desire to maintain absolute equality

is well illustrated by the article of the statutes regarding the

administration: the office-bearers are not to be chosen by election,

but all members are to be office-bearers in turn, and the term of office

must not exceed one month!

The avowed aim of the society was to destroy the existing social order,

and to replace it by one in which there should be no private property

and no distinctions of class or wealth; or, as it is expressed in one

document, "to found on the ruins of the present social organisation the

Empire of the working classes." The means to be employed were indicated

in a general way, but each member was to adapt himself to circumstances

and was to devote all his energy to forwarding the cause of the

revolution. For the guidance of the inexperienced, the following means

were recommended: simple conversations, dissemination of pamphlets, the

exciting of discontent, the formation of organised groups, the creation

of funds and libraries. These, taken together, constitute, in the

terminology of revolutionary science, "propaganda," and in addition to

it there should be "agitation." The technical distinction between these

two processes is that propaganda has a purely preparatory character, and

aims merely at enlightening the masses regarding the true nature of the

revolutionary cause, whereas agitation aims at exciting an individual

or a group to acts which are considered, in the existing regime, as

illegal. In time of peace "pure agitation" was to be carried on by

means of organised bands which should frighten the Government and the

privileged classes, draw away the attention of the authorities from less

overt kinds of revolutionary action, raise the spirit of the people

and thereby render it more accessible to revolutionary ideas, obtain

pecuniary means for further activity, and liberate political prisoners.

In time of insurrection the members should give to all movements every

assistance in their power, and impress on them a Socialistic character.

The central administration and the local branches should establish

relations with publishers, and take steps to secure a regular supply

of prohibited books from abroad. Such are a few characteristic

extracts from a document which might fairly be called a treatise on

revolutionology.

As a specimen of the revolutionary pamphlets circulated by the

propagandists and agitators I may give here a brief account of one which

is well known to the political police. It is entitled Khitraya Mekhanika

(Cunning Machinery), and gives a graphic picture of the ideas and

methods employed. The mise en scene is extremely simple. Two peasants,

Stepan and Andrei, are represented as meeting in a gin-shop and drinking

together. Stepan is described as good and kindly when he has to do

with men of his own class, but very sharp-tongued when speaking with

a foreman or manager. Always ready with an answer, he can on occasions

silence even an official! He has travelled all over the Empire, has

associated with all sorts and conditions of men, sees everything most

clearly, and is, in short, a very remarkable man. One of his excellent

qualities is that, being "enlightened" himself, he is always ready to

enlighten others, and he now finds an opportunity of displaying his

powers. When Andrei, who is still unenlightened, proposes that they

should drink another glass of vodka, he replies that the Tsar, together

with the nobles and traders, bars the way to the throat. As his

companion does not understand this metaphorical language, he explains

that if there were no Tsars, nobles, or traders, he could get five

glasses of vodka for the sum that he now pays for one glass. This

naturally suggests wider topics, and Stepan gives something like a

lecture. The common people, he explains, pay by far the greater part

of the taxation, and at the same time do all the work; they plough the

fields, build the houses and churches, work in the mills and factories,

and in return they are systematically robbed and beaten. And what is

done with all the money that is taken from them? First of all, the Tsar

gets nine millions of roubles--enough to feed half a province--and

with that sum he amuses himself, has hunting-parties, and feasts, eats,

drinks, makes merry, and lives in stone houses. He gave liberty, it is

true, to the peasants; but we know what the Emancipation really was. The

best land was taken away and the taxes were increased, lest the

muzhik should get fat and lazy. The Tsar is himself the richest landed

proprietor and manufacturer in the country. He not only robs us as much

as he pleases, but he has sold into slavery (by forming a national debt)

our children and grandchildren. He takes our sons as soldiers, shuts

them up in barracks so that they should not see their brother-peasants,

and hardens their hearts so that they become wild beasts, ready to rend

their parents. The nobles and traders likewise rob the poor peasants. In

short, all the upper classes have invented a bit of cunning machinery

by which the muzhik is made to pay for their pleasures and luxuries. The

people will one day rise and break this machinery to pieces. When that

day comes they must break every part of it, for if one bit escapes

destruction all the other parts of it will immediately grow up again.

All the force is on the side of the peasants, if they only knew how

to use it. Knowledge will come in time. They will then destroy this

machine, and perceive that the only real remedy for all social evils is

brotherhood. People should live like brothers, having no mine and thine,

but all things in common. When we have created brotherhood, there will

be no riches and no thieves, but right and righteousness without end. In

conclusion, Stepan addresses a word to "the torturers": "When the

people rise, the Tsar will send troops against us, and the nobles and

capitalists will stake their last rouble on the result. If they do not

succeed, they must not expect any quarter from us. They may conquer us

once or twice, but we shall at last get our own, for there is no power

that can withstand the whole people. Then we shall cleanse the country

of our persecutors, and establish a brotherhood in which there will

be no mine and thine, but all will work for the common weal. We shall

construct no cunning machinery, but shall pluck up evil by the roots,

and establish eternal justice!"

The above-mentioned distinction between Propaganda and Agitation, which

plays a considerable part in revolutionary literature, had at that time

more theoretical than practical importance. The great majority of

those who took an active part in the movement confined their efforts

to indoctrinating the masses with Socialistic and subversive ideas, and

sometimes their methods were rather childish. As an illustration I

may cite an amusing incident related by one of the boldest and most

tenacious of the revolutionists, who subsequently acquired a certain

sense of humour. He and a friend were walking one day on a country road,

when they were overtaken by a peasant in his cart. Ever anxious to sow

the good seed, they at once entered into conversation with the rustic,

telling him that he ought not to pay his taxes, because the tchinovniks

robbed the people, and trying to convince him by quotations from

Scripture that he ought to resist the authorities. The prudent muzhik

whipped up his horse and tried to get out of hearing, but the two

zealots ran after him and continued the sermon till they were completely

out of breath. Other propagandists were more practical, and preached

a species of agrarian socialism which the rural population could

understand. At the time of the Emancipation the peasants were convinced

as I have mentioned in a previous chapter, that the Tsar meant to give

them all the land, and to compensate the landed proprietors by salaries.

Even when the law was read and explained to them, they clung obstinately

to their old convictions, and confidently expected that the REAL

Emancipation would be proclaimed shortly. Taking advantage of this state

of things, the propagandists to whom I refer confirmed the peasants

in their error, and sought in this way to sow discontent against the

proprietors and the Government. Their watchword was "Land and Liberty,"

and they formed for a good many years a distinct group, under that title

(Zemlya i Volya, or more briefly Zemlevoltsi).

In the St. Petersburg group, which aspired to direct and control this

movement, there were one or two men who held different views as to the

real object of propaganda and agitation. One of these, Prince Krapotkin,

has told the world what his object was at that time. He hoped that the

Government would be frightened and that the Autocratic Power, as in

France on the eve of the Revolution, would seek support in the landed

proprietors, and call together a National Assembly. Thus a constitution

would be granted, and though the first Assembly might be conservative

in spirit, autocracy would be compelled in the long run to yield to

parliamentary pressure.

No such elaborate projects were entertained, I believe, by the majority

of the propagandists. Their reasoning was much simpler: "The Government,

having become reactionary, tries to prevent us from enlightening the

people; we will do it in spite of the Government!" The dangers to which

they exposed themselves only confirmed them in their resolution. Though

they honestly believed themselves to be Realists and Materialists, they

were at heart romantic Idealists, panting to do something heroic. They

had been taught by the apostles whom they venerated, from Belinski

downwards, that the man who simply talks about the good of the people,

and does nothing to promote it, is among the most contemptible of human

beings. No such reproach must be addressed to them. If the Government

opposed and threatened, that was no excuse for inactivity. They must be

up and doing. "Forward! forward! Let us plunge into the people, identify

ourselves with them, and work for their benefit! Suffering is in

store for us, but we must endure it with fortitude!" The type which

Tchernishevski had depicted in his famous novel, under the name of

Rakhmetof--the youth who led an ascetic life and subjected himself

to privation and suffering as a preparation for future revolutionary

activity--now appeared in the flesh. If we may credit Bakunin, these

Rakhmetofs had not even the consolation of believing in the possibility

of a revolution, but as they could not and would not remain passive

spectators of the misfortunes of the people, they resolved to go

in among the masses in order to share with them fraternally

their sufferings, and at the same time to teach and prepare, not

theoretically, but practically by their living example.* This is, I

believe, an exaggeration. The propagandists were, for the most part of

incredibly sanguine temperament.

* Bakunin: "Gosudarstvennost' i Anarkhiya" ("State

Organisation and Anarchy"), Zurich, 1873.

The success of the propaganda and agitation was not at all in proportion

to the numbers and enthusiasm of those who took part in it. Most

of these displayed more zeal than mother-wit and discretion. Their

Socialism was too abstract and scientific to be understood by rustics,

and when they succeeded in making themselves intelligible they awakened

in their hearers more suspicion than sympathy. The muzhik is a very

matter-of-fact practical person, totally incapable of understanding what

Americans call "hifalutin" tendencies in speech and conduct, and as

he listened to the preaching of the new Gospel doubts and questionings

spontaneously rose in his mind: "What do those young people, who betray

their gentlefolk origin by their delicate white hands, their foreign

phrases, their ignorance of the common things of everyday peasant life,

really want? Why are they bearing hardships and taking so much

trouble? They tell us it is for our good, but we are not such fools and

simpletons as they take us for. They are not doing it all for nothing.

What do they expect from us in return? Whatever it is, they are

evidently evil-doers, and perhaps moshenniki (swindlers). Devil take

them!" and thereupon the cautious muzhik turns his back upon his

disinterested self-sacrificing teachers, or goes quietly and denounces

them to the police! It is not only in Spain that we encounter Don

Quixotes and Sancho Panzas!

Occasionally a worse fate befell the missionaries. If they allowed

themselves, as they sometimes did, to "blaspheme" against religion or

the Tsar, they ran the risk of being maltreated on the spot. I have

heard of one case in which the punishment for blasphemy was applied by

sturdy peasant matrons. Even when they escaped such mishaps they had

not much reason to congratulate themselves on their success. After three

years of arduous labour the hundreds of apostles could not boast of more

than a score or two of converts among the genuine working classes, and

even these few did not all remain faithful unto death. Some of them,

however, it must be admitted, laboured and suffered to the end with the

courage and endurance of true martyrs.

It was not merely the indifference or hostility of the masses that the

propagandists had to complain of. The police soon got on their track,

and did not confine themselves to persuasion and logical arguments.

Towards the end of 1873 they arrested some members of the central

directory group in St. Petersburg, and in the following May they

discovered in the province of Saratof an affiliated organisation

with which nearly 800 persons were connected, about one-fifth of them

belonging to the female sex. A few came of well-to-do families--sons and

daughters of minor officials or small landed proprietors--but the great

majority were poor students of humbler origin, a large contingent being

supplied by the sons of the poor parish clergy. In other provinces the

authorities made similar discoveries. Before the end of the year a large

proportion of the propagandists were in prison, and the centralised

organisation, so far as such a thing existed, was destroyed. Gradually

it dawned on the minds even of the Don Quixotes that pacific propaganda

was no longer possible, and that attempts to continue it could lead only

to useless sacrifices.

For a time there was universal discouragement in the revolutionary

ranks; and among those who had escaped arrest there were mutual

recriminations and endless discussions about the causes of failure and

the changes to be made in modes of action. The practical results of

these recriminations and discussions was that the partisans of a slow,

pacific propaganda retired to the background, and the more impatient

revolutionary agitators took possession of the movement. These

maintained stoutly that as pacific propaganda had become impossible,

stronger methods must be adopted. The masses must be organised so as

to offer successful resistance to the Government. Conspiracies must

therefore be formed, local disorders provoked, and blood made to flow.

The part of the country which seemed best adapted for experiments of

this kind was the southern and southeastern region, inhabited by

the descendants of the turbulent Cossack population which had raised

formidable insurrections under Stenka Razin and Pugatcheff in the

seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Here, then, the more impatient

agitators began their work. A Kief group called the Buntari (rioters),

composed of about twenty-five individuals, settled in various localities

as small shopkeepers or horse dealers, or went about as workmen or

peddlers. One member of the group has given us in his reminiscences an

amusing account of the experiment. Everywhere the agitators found the

peasants suspicious and inhospitable, and consequently they had to

suffer a great deal of discomfort. Some of them at once gave up the

task as hopeless. The others settled in a village and began operations.

Having made a topographic survey of the locality, they worked out an

ingenious plan of campaign; but they had no recruits for the future army

of insurrection, and if they had been able to get recruits, they had no

arms for them, and no money wherewith to purchase arms or anything else.

In these circumstances they gravely appointed a committee to collect

funds, knowing very well that no money would be forthcoming. It was

as if a shipwrecked crew in an open boat, having reached the brink of

starvation, appointed a committee to obtain a supply of fresh water and

provisions! In the hope of obtaining assistance from headquarters, a

delegate was sent to St. Petersburg and Moscow to explain that for the

arming of the population about a quarter of a million of roubles was

required. The delegate brought back thirty second-hand revolvers! The

revolutionist who confesses all this* recognises that the whole scheme

was childishly unpractical: "We chose the path of popular insurrection

because we had faith in the revolutionary spirit of the masses, in its

power and its invincibility. That was the weak side of our position; and

the most curious part of it was that we drew proofs in support of

our theory from history--from the abortive insurrections of Pazin and

Pugatcheff, which took place in an age when the Government had only a

small regular army and no railways or telegraphs! We did not even think

of attempting a propaganda among the military!" In the district of

Tchigirin the agitators had a little momentary success, but the result

was the same. There a student called Stefanovitch pretended that the

Tsar was struggling with the officials to benefit the peasantry, and he

showed the simple rustics a forged imperial manifesto in which they were

ordered to form a society for the purpose of raising an insurrection

against the officials, the nobles, and the priests. At one moment

(April, 1877), the society had about 600 members, but a few months

later it was discovered by the police, and the leaders and peasants were

arrested.

* Debogorio-Mokrievitch. "Vospominaniya" ("Reminiscences").

Paris, 1894-99.

When it had thus become evident that propaganda and agitation were alike

useless, and when numerous arrests were being made daily, it became

necessary for the revolutionists to reconsider their position, and some

of the more moderate proposed to rally to the Liberals, as a temporary

measure. Hitherto there had been very little sympathy and a good deal of

openly avowed hostility between Liberals and revolutionists. The latter,

convinced that they could overthrow the Autocratic Power by their own

unaided efforts, had looked askance at Liberalism because they believed

that parliamentary discussions and party struggles would impede rather

than facilitate the advent of the Socialist Millennium, and strengthen

the domination of the bourgeoisie without really improving the condition

of the masses. Now, however, when the need of allies was felt, it seemed

that constitutional government might be used as a stepping-stone for

reaching the Socialist ideal, because it must grant a certain liberty

of the Press and of association, and it would necessarily abolish the

existing autocratic system of arresting, imprisoning and exiling, on

mere suspicion, without any regular form of legal procedure. As usual,

an appeal was made to history, and arguments were easily found in favour

of this course of action. The past of other nations had shown that in

the march of progress there are no sudden leaps and bounds, and it was

therefore absurd to imagine, as the revolutionists had hitherto done,

that Russian Autocracy could be swallowed by Socialism at a gulp.

There must always be periods of transition, and it seemed that such a

transition period might now be initiated. Liberalism might be allowed to

destroy, or at least weaken, Autocracy, and then it might be destroyed

in its turn by Socialism of the most advanced type.

Having adopted this theory of gradual historic development, some of the

more practical revolutionists approached the more advanced Liberals

and urged them to more energetic action; but before anything could be

arranged the more impatient revolutionists--notably the group called

the Narodovoltsi (National-will-ists)--intervened, denounced what they

considered an unholy alliance, and proposed a policy of terrorism

by which the Government would be frightened into a more conciliatory

attitude. Their idea was that the officials who displayed most zeal

against the revolutionary movement should be assassinated, and that

every act of severity on the part of the Administration should be

answered by an act of "revolutionary justice."

As it was evident that the choice between these two courses of action

must determine in great measure the future character and ultimate fate

of the movement, there was much discussion between the two groups; but

the question did not long remain in suspense. Soon the extreme party

gained the upper hand, and the Terrorist policy was adopted. I shall let

the revolutionists themselves explain this momentous decision. In a long

proclamation published some years later it is explained thus:

"The revolutionary movement in Russia began with the so-called 'going

in among the people.' The first Russian revolutionists thought that the

freedom of the people could be obtained only by the people itself, and

they imagined that the only thing necessary was that the people should

absorb Socialistic ideas. To this it was supposed that the peasantry

were naturally inclined, because they already possess, in the rural

Commune, institutions which contain the seeds of Socialism, and which

might serve as a basis for the reconstruction of society according to

Socialist principles. The propagandists hoped, therefore, that in the

teachings of West European Socialism the people would recognise its own

instinctive creations in riper and more clearly defined forms and that

it would joyfully accept the new teaching.

"But the people did not understand its friends, and showed itself

hostile to them. It turned out that institutions born in slavery could

not serve as a foundation for the new construction, and that the man who

was yesterday a serf, though capable of taking part in disturbances, is

not fitted for conscious revolutionary work. With pain in their heart

the revolutionists had to confess that they were deceived in their hopes

of the people. Around them were no social revolutionary forces on which

they could lean for support, and yet they could not reconcile themselves

with the existing state of violence and slavery. Thereupon awakened a

last hope--the hope of a drowning man who clutches at a straw: a little

group of heroic and self-sacrificing individuals might accomplish with

their own strength the difficult task of freeing Russia from the yoke

of autocracy. They had to do it themselves, because there was no other

means. But would they be able to accomplish it? For them that question

did not exist. The struggle of that little group against autocracy was

like the heroic means on which a doctor decides when there is no longer

any hope of the patient's recovery. Terrorism was the only means that

remained, and it had the advantage of giving a natural vent to pent-up

feelings, and of seeming a reaction against the cruel persecutions of

the Government. The party called the Narodnaya Volya (National Will)

was accordingly formed, and during several years the world witnessed

a spectacle that had never been seen before in history. The Narodnaya

Volya, insignificant in numbers but strong in spirit, engaged in single

combat with the powerful Russian Government. Neither executions, nor

imprisonment with hard labour, nor ordinary imprisonment and exile,

destroyed the energy of the revolutionists. Under their shots fell,

one after the other, the most zealous and typical representatives of

arbitrary action and violence. . . ."

It was at this time, in 1877, when propaganda and agitation among the

masses were being abandoned for the system of terrorism, but before any

assassinations had taken place, that I accidentally came into personal

relations with some prominent adherents of the revolutionary movement.

One day a young man of sympathetic appearance, whom I did not know and

who brought no credentials, called on me in St. Petersburg and suggested

to me that I might make public through the English Press what he

described as a revolting act of tyranny and cruelty committed by General

Trepof, the Prefect of the city. That official, he said, in visiting

recently one of the prisons, had noticed that a young political prisoner

called Bogolubof did not salute him as he passed, and he had ordered him

to be flogged in consequence. To this I replied that I had no reason to

disbelieve the story, but that I had equally no reason to accept it as

accurate, as it rested solely on the evidence of a person with whom I

was totally unacquainted. My informant took the objection in good part,

and offered me the names and addresses of a number of persons who could

supply me with any proofs that I might desire.

At his next visit I told him I had seen several of the persons he had

named, and that I could not help perceiving that they were closely

connected with the revolutionary movement. I then went on to suggest

that as the sympathisers with that movement constantly complained that

they were systematically misrepresented, calumniated and caricatured,

the leaders ought to give the world an accurate account of their real

doctrines, and in this respect I should be glad to assist them.

Already I knew something of the subject, because I had many friends

and acquaintances among the sympathisers, and had often had with them

interminable discussions. With their ideas, so far as I knew them, I

felt bound to confess that I had no manner of sympathy, but I flattered

myself, and he himself had admitted, that I was capable of describing

accurately and criticising impartially doctrines with which I did not

agree. My new acquaintance, whom I may call Dimitry Ivan'itch, was

pleased with the proposal, and after he had consulted with some of

his friends, we came to an agreement by which I should receive all the

materials necessary for writing an accurate account of the doctrinal

side of the movement. With regard to any conspiracies that might be in

progress, I warned him that he must be strictly reticent, because if I

came accidentally to know of any terrorist designs, I should consider

it my duty to warn the authorities. For this reason I declined to attend

any secret conclaves, and it was agreed that I should be instructed

without being initiated.

The first step in my instruction was not very satisfactory or

encouraging. One day Dimitri Ivan'itch brought me a large manuscript,

which contained, he said, the real doctrines of the revolutionists and

the explanation of their methods. I was surprised to find that it was

written in English, and I perceived at a glance that it was not at all

what I wanted. As soon as I had read the first sentence I turned to my

friend and said:

"I am very sorry to find, Dimitri Ivan'itch, that you have not kept your

part of the bargain. We agreed, you may remember, that we were to act

towards each other in absolutely good faith, and here I find a flagrant

bit of bad faith in the very first sentence of the manuscript which

you have brought me. The document opens with the statement that a large

number of students have been arrested and imprisoned for distributing

books among the people. That statement may be true according to the

letter, but it is evidently intended to mislead. These youths have been

arrested, as you must know, not for distributing ordinary books, as the

memorandum suggests, but for distributing books of a certain kind. I

have read some of them, and I cannot feel at all surprised that the

Government should object to their being put into the hands of the

ignorant masses. Take, for example, the one entitled Khitraya Mekhanika,

and others of the same type. The practical teaching they contain is that

the peasants should be ready to rise and cut the throats of the landed

proprietors and officials. Now, a wholesale massacre of the kind may

or may not be desirable in the interests of Society, and justifiable

according to some new code of higher morality. That is a question

into which I do not enter. All I maintain is that the writer of this

memorandum, in speaking of 'books,' meant to mislead me."

Dimitri Ivan'itch looked puzzled and ashamed. "Forgive me," he said; "I

am to blame--not for having attempted to deceive you, but for not having

taken precautions. I have not read the manuscript, and I could not if

I wished, for it is written in English, and I know no language but my

mother tongue. My friends ought not to have done this. Give me back the

paper, and I shall take care that nothing of the sort occurs in future."

This promise was faithfully kept, and I had no further reason

to complain. Dimitri Ivan'itch gave me a considerable amount of

information, and lent me a valuable collection of revolutionary

pamphlets. Unfortunately the course of tuition was suddenly interrupted

by unforeseen circumstances, which I may mention as characteristic

of life in St. Petersburg at the time. My servant, an excellent young

Russian, more honest than intelligent, came to me one morning with a

mysterious air, and warned me to be on my guard, because there were "bad

people" going about. On being pressed a little, he explained to me what

he meant. Two strangers had come to him and, after offering him a few

roubles, had asked him a number of questions about my habits--at what

hour I went out and came home, what persons called on me, and much more

of the same sort. "They even tried, sir, to get into your sitting-room;

but of course I did not allow them. I believe they want to rob you!"

It was not difficult to guess who these "bad people" were who took such

a keen interest in my doings, and who wanted to examine my apartment in

my absence. Any doubts I had on the subject were soon removed. On

the morrow and following days I noticed that whenever I went out,

and wherever I might walk or drive, I was closely followed by two

unsympathetic-looking individuals--so closely that when I turned round

sharp they ran into me. The first and second times this little accident

occurred they received a strong volley of unceremonious vernacular;

but when we became better acquainted we simply smiled at each other

knowingly, as the old Roman Augurs are supposed to have done when they

met in public unobserved. There was no longer any attempt at concealment

or mystification. I knew I was being shadowed, and the shadowers could

not help perceiving that I knew it. Yet, strange to say, they were never

changed!

The reader probably assumes that the secret police had somehow got wind

of my relations with the revolutionists. Such an assumption presupposes

on the part of the police an amount of intelligence and perspicacity

which they do not usually possess. On this occasion they were on

an entirely wrong scent, and the very day when I first noticed my

shadowers, a high official, who seemed to regard the whole thing as

a good joke, told me confidentially what the wrong scent was. At the

instigation of an ex-ambassador, from whom I had the misfortune to

differ in matters of foreign policy, the Moscow Gazette had denounced me

publicly by name as a person who was in the habit of visiting daily the

Ministry of Foreign Affairs--doubtless with the nefarious purpose of

obtaining by illegal means secret political information--and the police

had concluded that I was a fit and proper person to be closely watched.

In reality, my relations with the Russian Foreign Office, though

inconvenient to the ex-ambassador, were perfectly regular and

above-board--sanctioned, in fact, by Prince Gortchakoff--but the

indelicate attentions of the secret police were none the less extremely

unwelcome, because some intelligent police-agent might get onto the real

scent, and cause me serious inconvenience. I determined, therefore,

to break off all relations with Dimitri Ivan'itch and his friends, and

postpone my studies to a more convenient season; but that decision

did not entirely extricate me from my difficulties. The collection of

revolutionary pamphlets was still in my possession, and I had promised

to return it. For some little time I did not see how I could keep my

promise without compromising myself or others, but at last--after having

had my shadowers carefully shadowed in order to learn accurately their

habits, and having taken certain elaborate precautions, with which I

need not trouble the reader, as he is not likely ever to require them--I

paid a visit secretly to Dimitri Ivan'itch in his small room, almost

destitute of furniture, handed him the big parcel of pamphlets, warned

him not to visit me again, and bade him farewell. Thereupon we went our

separate ways and I saw him no more. Whether he subsequently played a

leading part in the movement I never could ascertain, because I did

not know his real name; but if the conception which I formed of his

character was at all accurate, he probably ended his career in Siberia,

for he was not a man to look back after having put his hand to the

plough. That is a peculiar trait of the Russian revolutionists of the

period in question. Their passion for realising an impossible ideal was

incurable. Many of them were again and again arrested; and as soon as

they escaped or were liberated they almost invariably went back to their

revolutionary activity and worked energetically until they again fell

into the clutches of the police.

From this digression into the sphere of personal reminiscences I return

now and take up again the thread of the narrative.

We have seen how the propaganda and the agitation had failed, partly

because the masses showed themselves indifferent or hostile, and partly

because the Government adopted vigorous repressive measures. We have

seen, too, how the leaders found themselves in face of a formidable

dilemma; either they must abandon their schemes or they must attack

their persecutors. The more energetic among them, as I have already

stated, chose the latter alternative, and they proceeded at once to

carry out their policy. In the course of a single year (February, 1878,

to February, 1879) a whole series of terrorist crimes was committed; in

Kief an attempt was made on the life of the Public Prosecutor, and an

officer of gendarmerie was stabbed; in St. Petersburg the Chief of the

Political Police of the Empire (General Mezentsef) was assassinated in

broad daylight in one of the central streets, and a similar attempt

was made on his successor (General Drenteln); at Kharkof the Governor

(Prince Krapotkin) was shot dead when entering his residence. During the

same period two members of the revolutionary organisation, accused of

treachery, were "executed" by order of local Committees. In most cases

the perpetrators of the crimes contrived to escape. One of them became

well known in Western Europe as an author under the pseudonym of

Stepniak.

Terrorism had not the desired effect. On the contrary, it stimulated the

zeal and activity of the authorities, and in the course of the winter of

1878-79 hundreds of arrests--some say as many as 2,000--were made in

St. Petersburg alone. Driven to desperation, the revolutionists still

at large decided that it was useless to assassinate mere officials; the

fons et origo mali must be reached; a blow must be struck at the Tsar

himself! The first attempt was made by a young man called Solovyoff, who

fired several shots at Alexander II. as he was walking near the Winter

Palace, but none of them took effect.

This policy of aggressive terrorism did not meet with universal approval

among the revolutionists, and it was determined to discuss the matter

at a Congress of delegates from various local circles. The meetings were

held in June, 1879, two months after Solovyoff's unsuccessful attempt,

at two provincial towns, Lipetsk and Voronezh. It was there agreed in

principle to confirm the decision of the Terrorist Narodovoltsi. As the

Liberals were not in a position to create liberal institutions or to

give guarantees for political rights, which are the essential conditions

of any Socialist agitation, there remained for the revolutionary party

no other course than to destroy the despotic autocracy. Thereupon a

programme of action was prepared, and an Executive Committee elected.

From that moment, though there were still many who preferred milder

methods, the Terrorists had the upper hand, and they at once proceeded

to centralise the organisation and to introduce stricter discipline,

with greater precautions to ensure secrecy.

The Executive Committee imagined that by assassinating the Tsar

autocracy might be destroyed, and several carefully planned attempts

were made. The first plan was to wreck the train when the Imperial

family were returning to St. Petersburg from the Crimea. Mines were

accordingly laid at three separate points, but they all failed. At the

last of the three points (near Moscow) a train was blown up, but it was

not the one in which the Imperial family was travelling.

Not at all discouraged by this failure, nor by the discovery of its

secret printing-press by the police, the Executive Committee next tried

to attain its object by an explosion of dynamite in the Winter Palace

when the Imperial family were assembled at dinner. The execution was

entrusted to a certain Halturin, one of the few revolutionists of

peasant origin. As an exceptionally clever carpenter and polisher, he

easily found regular employment in the palace, and he contrived to make

a rough plan of the building. This plan, on which the dining-hall was

marked with an ominous red cross, fell into the hands of the police, and

they made what they considered a careful investigation; but they failed

to unravel the plot and did not discover the dynamite concealed in the

carpenters' sleeping quarters. Halturin showed wonderful coolness while

the search was going on, and continued to sleep every night on the

explosive, though it caused him excruciating headaches. When he was

assured by the chemist of the Executive Committee that the quantity

collected was sufficient, he exploded the mine at the usual dinner hour,

and contrived to escape uninjured.* In the guardroom immediately above

the spot where the dynamite was exploded ten soldiers were killed and 53

wounded, and in the dining-hall the floor was wrecked, but the Imperial

family escaped in consequence of not sitting down to dinner at the usual

hour.

* After living some time in Roumania he returned to Russia

under the name of Stepanof, and in 1882 he was tried and

executed for complicity in the assassination of General

Strebnekof.

For this barbarous act the Executive Committee publicly accepted full

responsibility. In a proclamation placarded in the streets of St.

Petersburg it declared that, while regretting the death of the soldiers,

it was resolved to carry on the struggle with the Autocratic Power

until the social reforms should be entrusted to a Constituent Assembly,

composed of members freely elected and furnished with instructions from

their constituents.

Finding police-repression so ineffectual, Alexander II. determined to

try the effect of conciliation, and for this purpose he placed Loris

Melikof at the head of the Government, with semi-dictatorial powers

(February, 1880). The experiment did not succeed. By the Terrorists

it was regarded as "a hypocritical Liberalism outwardly and a veiled

brutality within," while in the official world it was condemned as an

act of culpable weakness on the part of the autocracy. One consequence

of it was that the Executive Committee was encouraged to continue its

efforts, and, as the police became much less active, it was enabled

to improve the revolutionary organisation. In a circular sent to the

affiliated provincial associations it explained that the only source

of legislation must be the national will,* and as the Government would

never accept such a principle, its hand must be forced by a great

popular insurrection, for which all available forces should be

organised. The peasantry, as experience had shown, could not yet be

relied on, but efforts should be made to enrol the workmen of the towns.

Great importance was attached to propaganda in the army; but as few

conversions had been made among the rank and file, attention was to

be directed chiefly to the officers, who would be able to carry their

subordinates with them at the critical moment.

* Hence the designation Narodovoltsi (which, as we have

seen, means literally National-will-ists) adopted by this

section.

While thus recommending the scheme of destroying autocracy by means of

a popular insurrection in the distant future, the Committee had not

abandoned more expeditious methods, and it was at that moment hatching

a plot for the assassination of the Tsar. During the winter months his

Majesty was in the habit of holding on Sundays a small parade in the

riding-school near the Michael Square in St. Petersburg. On Sunday,

March 3d, 1881, the streets by which he usually returned to the Palace

had been undermined at two places, and on an alternative route several

conspirators were posted with hand-grenades concealed under their great

coats. The Emperor chose the alternative route. Here, at a signal given

by Sophia Perovski, the first grenade was thrown by a student called

Ryssakoff, but it merely wounded some members of the escort. The Emperor

stopped and got out of his sledge, and as he was making inquiries about

the wounded soldiers a second grenade was thrown by a youth called

Grinevitski, with fatal effect. Alexander II. was conveyed hurriedly to

the Winter Palace, and died almost immediately.

By this act the members of the Executive Committee proved their energy

and their talent as conspirators, but they at the same time showed their

shortsightedness and their political incapacity; for they had made no

preparations for immediately seizing the power which they so ardently

coveted--with the intention of using it, of course, entirely for the

public good. If the facts were not so well authenticated, we might

dismiss the whole story as incredible. A group of young people,

certainly not more than thirty or forty in number, without any organised

material force behind them, without any influential accomplices in the

army or the official world, without any prospect of support from the

masses, and with no plan for immediate action after the assassination,

deliberately provoked the crisis for which they were so hopelessly

unprepared. It has been suggested that they expected the Liberals

to seize the Supreme Power, but this explanation is evidently an

afterthought, because they knew that the Liberals were as unprepared

as themselves and they regarded them at that time as dangerous

rivals. Besides this, the explanation is quite irreconcilable with the

proclamation issued by the Executive Committee immediately afterwards.

The most charitable way of explaining the conduct of the conspirators is

to suppose that they were actuated more by blind hatred of the autocracy

and its agents than by political calculations of a practical kind--that

they acted simply like a wounded bull in the arena, which shuts its eyes

and recklessly charges its tormentors.

The murder of the Emperor had not at all the effect which the

Narodovoltsi anticipated. On the contrary, it destroyed their hopes of

success. Many people of liberal convictions who sympathised vaguely with

the revolutionary movement without taking part in it, and who did not

condemn very severely the attacks on police officials, were horrified

when they found that the would-be reformers did not spare even the

sacred person of the Tsar. At the same time, the police officials, who

had become lax and inefficient under the conciliatory regime of Loris

Melikof, recovered their old zeal, and displayed such inordinate

activity that the revolutionary organisation was paralysed and in great

measure destroyed. Six of the regicides were condemned to death, and

five of them publicly executed, amongst the latter Sophia Perovski,

one of the most active and personally sympathetic personages among the

revolutionists. Scores of those who had taken an active part in the

movement were in prison or in exile. For a short time the propaganda

was continued among military and naval officers, and various attempts

at reorganisation, especially in the southern provinces, were made, but

they all failed. A certain Degaief, who had taken part in the formation

of military circles, turned informer, and aided the police. By his

treachery not only a considerable number of officers, but also Vera

Filipof, a young lady of remarkable ability and courage, who was the

leading spirit in the attempts at reorganisation, were arrested. There

were still a number of leaders living abroad, and from time to time they

sent emissaries to revive the propaganda, but these efforts were all

fruitless. One of the active members of the revolutionary party, Leo

Deutsch, who has since published his Memoirs, relates how the tide of

revolution ebbed rapidly at this time. "Both in Russia and abroad,"

he says, "I had seen how the earlier enthusiasm had given way to

scepticism; men had lost faith, though many of them would not allow

that it was so. It was clear to me that a reaction had set in for

many years." Of the attempts to resuscitate the movement he says: "The

untried and unskilfully managed societies were run to death before they

could undertake anything definite, and the unity and interdependence

which characterised the original band of members had disappeared." With

regard to the want of unity, another prominent revolutionist (Maslof)

wrote to a friend (Dragomanof) at Geneva in 1882 in terms of bitter

complaint. He accused the Executive Committee of trying to play the

part of chief of the whole revolutionary party, and declared that its

centralising tendencies were more despotic than those of the Government.

Distributing orders among its adherents without initiating them into

its plans, it insisted on unquestioning obedience. The Socialist youth,

ardent adherents of Federalism, were indignant at this treatment, and

began to understand that the Committee used them simply as chair a

canon. The writer described in vivid colours the mutual hostility which

reigned among various fractions of the party, and which manifested

itself in accusations and even in denunciations; and he predicted that

the Narodnaya Volya, which had organised the various acts of terrorism

culminating in the assassination of the Emperor, would never develop

into a powerful revolutionary party. It had sunk into the slough of

untruth, and it could only continue to deceive the Government and the

public.

In the mutual recriminations several interesting admissions were made.

It was recognised that neither the educated classes nor the common

people were capable of bringing about a revolution: the former were not

numerous enough, and the latter were devoted to the Tsar and did not

sympathise with the revolutionary movement, though they might perhaps

be induced to rise at a moment of crisis. It was considered doubtful

whether such a rising was desirable, because the masses, being

insufficiently prepared, might turn against the educated minority. In no

case could a popular insurrection attain the object which the Socialists

had in view, because the power would either remain in the hands of the

Tsar--thanks to the devotion of the common people--or it would fall into

the hands of the Liberals, who would oppress the masses worse than the

autocratic Government had done. Further, it was recognised that acts of

terrorism were worse than useless, because they were misunderstood by

the ignorant, and tended to inflame the masses against the leaders.

It seemed necessary, therefore, to return to a pacific propaganda.

Tikhomirof, who was nominally directing the movement from abroad, became

utterly discouraged, and wrote in 1884 to one of his emissaries in

Russia (Lopatin): "You now see Russia, and can convince yourself that it

does not possess the material for a vast work of reorganisation. . . .

I advise you seriously not to make superhuman efforts and not to make

a scandal in attempting the impossible. . . . If you do not want to

satisfy yourself with trifles, come away and await better times."

In examining the material relating to this period one sees clearly that

the revolutionary movement had got into a vicious circle. As pacific

propaganda had become impossible, in consequence of the opposition of

the authorities and the vigilance of the police, the Government could be

overturned only by a general insurrection; but the general insurrection

could not be prepared without pacific propaganda. As for terrorism, it

had become discredited. Tikhomirof himself came to the conclusion that

the terrorist idea was altogether a mistake, not only morally, but also

from the point of view of political expediency. A party, he explained,

has either the force to overthrow the Government, or it has not; in the

former case it has no need of political assassination, and in the latter

the assassinations have no effect, because Governments are not so stupid

as to let themselves be frightened by those who cannot overthrow them.

Plainly there was nothing to be done but to wait for better times, as he

had suggested, and the better times did not seem to be within measurable

distance. He himself, after publishing a brochure entitled "Why I Ceased

to Be a Revolutionist," made his peace with the Government, and others

followed his example.* In one prison nine made formal recantations,

among them Emilianof, who held a reserve bomb ready when Alexander II.

was assassinated. Occasional acts of terrorism showed that there was

still fire under the smouldering embers, but they were few and far

between. The last serious incident of the kind during this period was

the regicide conspiracy of Sheviryoff in March, 1887. The conspirators,

carrying the bombs, were arrested in the principal street of St.

Petersburg, and five of them were hanged. The railway accident of Borki,

which happened in the following year, and in which the Imperial family

had a very narrow escape, ought perhaps to be added to the list, because

there is reason to believe that it was the work of revolutionists.

* Tikhomirof subsequently worked against the Social

Democrats in Moscow in the interests of the Government.

By this time all the cooler heads among the revolutionists, especially

those who were living abroad in personal safety, had come to understand

that the Socialist ideal could not be attained by popular insurrection,

terrorism, or conspiracies, and consequently that further activity

on the old lines was absurd. Those of them who did not abandon the

enterprise in despair reverted to the idea that Autocratic Power,

impregnable against frontal attacks, might be destroyed by prolonged

siege operations. This change of tactics is reflected in the

revolutionary literature. In 1889, for example, the editor of the

Svobodnaya Rossia declared that the aim of the movement now

was political freedom--not only as a stepping-stone to social

reorganisation, but as a good in itself. This is, he explains, the only

possible revolution at present in Russia. "For the moment there can be

no other immediate practical aim. Ulterior aims are not abandoned, but

they are not at present within reach. . . The revolutionists of the

seventies and the eighties did not succeed in creating among the

peasantry or the town workmen anything which had even the appearance

of a force capable of struggling with the Government; and the

revolutionists of the future will have no greater success until they

have obtained such political rights as personal inviolability. Our

immediate aim, therefore, is a National Assembly controlled by local

self-government, and this can be brought about only by a union of all

the revolutionary forces."

There were still indications, it is true, that the old spirit of

terrorism was not yet quite extinct: Captain Zolotykhin, for example,

an officer of the Moscow secret police, was assassinated by a female

revolutionist in 1890. But such incidents were merely the last fitful

sputterings of a lamp that was going out for want of oil. In 1892

Stepniak declared it evident to all that the professional revolutionists

could not alone overthrow autocracy, however great their energy and

heroism; and he arrived at the same conclusion as the writer just

quoted. Of course, immediate success was not to be expected. "It is only

from the evolutionist's point of view that the struggle with autocracy

has a meaning. From any other standpoint it must seem a sanguinary

farce--a mere exercise in the art of self-sacrifice!" Such are the

conclusions arrived at in 1892 by a man who had been in 1878 one of the

leading terrorists, and who had with his own hand assassinated General

Mezentsef, Chief of the Political Police.

Thus the revolutionary movement, after passing through four stages,

which I may call the academic, the propagandist, the insurrectionary,

and the terrorist, had failed to accomplish its object. One of those

who had taken an active part in it, and who, after spending two years

in Siberia as a political exile, escaped and settled in Western Europe,

could write thus: "Our revolutionary movement is dead, and we who are

still alive stand by the grave of our beautiful departed and discuss

what is wanting to her. One of us thinks that her nose should be

improved; another suggests a change in her chin or her hair. We do not

notice the essential that what our beautiful departed wants is life;

that it is not a matter of hair or eyebrows, but of a living soul, which

formerly concealed all defects, and made her beautiful, and which now

has flown away. However we may invent changes and improvements, all

these things are utterly insignificant in comparison with what is really

wanting, and what we cannot give; for who can breathe a living soul into

a corpse?"

In truth, the movement which I have endeavoured to describe was at an

end; but another movement, having the same ultimate object, was coming

into existence, and it constitutes one of the essential factors of

the present situation. Some of the exiles in Switzerland and Paris had

become acquainted with the social-democratic and labour movements in

Western Europe, and they believed that the strategy and tactics employed

in these movements might be adopted in Russia. How far they have

succeeded in carrying out this policy I shall relate presently; but

before entering on this subject, I must explain how the application

of such a policy had been rendered possible by changes in the economic

conditions. Russia had begun to create rapidly a great manufacturing

industry and an industrial proletariat. This will form the subject of

the next chapter.

Russia · 第 35 / 39 章