Letter to the Politburo, February 15, 1931

Add a subpage to this text

Read the help page for usage.

 

You of course know, through the office of the Soviet ambassador in Berlin, that my case against the Dresden publisher Schumann, owner of the firm K. Reissner, has been taken to the next court of appeals on the initiative of the publisher, who had lost the case at the first two trial levels, in Berlin and Dresden.

As you also know, through the Berlin office, which entered into close relations with the Dresden publisher from the very beginning of my dispute with him and which has provided him with a big order from the Soviet government, Schumann is demanding of me the manuscript of my book Lenin and the Epigones, obviously assuming that possession of this manuscript would further improve his relations with certain agencies of the Soviet government.

The new court (the Oberlandesgericht) has decided that it cannot limit itself to the purely juridical aspect of the case, but must clarify its political basis. With this aim in mind, it has found it necessary to call in expert opinion, based on the recommendations of Leipzig University. The following questions were posed by the court for the expert to investigate. I quote verbatim:

"(1) How should the relations between Trotsky and Kerensky be regarded?

"(a) In what way did the political views of the two men contradict one another?

"(b) How did these contradictions affect the personal relations between Trotsky and Kerensky?

"In particular, did the latter seek the personal destruction of Trotsky?

"(2) Is it possible, at the present level of historical research, to establish the existence of objectively untrue statements in Kerensky's book in regard to Lenin and Bolshevism? If so, to what extent do they refer injuriously to Trotsky other than to mention him by name?"

The political importance of these questions goes far beyond the limits of my suit against Schumann. Although the Leipzig court, naturally, does not represent history's last stage of appeal, nevertheless an unfavorable or ambiguous political argument in the written opinion explaining the court's ruling could provide fresh fuel not only for the Russian emigres but for the bourgeoisie of the whole world for a considerable time to come. On the other hand, a clear and unambiguous resolution by the court of the questions it has raised itself could strike quite a telling blow to the most vicious enemies of the October Revolution and Bolshevism.

In itself, Kerensky’s slander is so crude and contradictory that the court ought to arrive, regardless of its political leanings, at the proper answers to the above-cited questions if the attorneys and academic expert can simply be provided with all the necessary documents and references.

Quite clearly, no foreign attorney, even one who is completely conscientious, is in a position to thoroughly investigate the testimony of Kerensky and others on the alleged "venality" of the Bolsheviks. As is surely no secret to you, I will not have the opportunity, when the case is argued, to be present in Germany in order to provide the necessary clarifications and refutations on the spot.

Stuck as I am in Constantinople, where there is no library and where no Soviet publications are available at all, I have not even been able to draw up a selection of the necessary printed materials for use by the attorney and academic expert, not even the most important documents on the case against the Bolsheviks after the July days.

In appealing to you with this letter, I completely leave aside all the questions that divide us, in particular the circumstances that brought you into alliance with Schumann in the fight to obtain the manuscript of my book. The course of events has now brought this legal suit to a new plane, on which a united front has become absolutely obligatory for us. There is no need for me to indicate to you the various ways appropriate for you to intervene in this case to help the court establish the truth. You have in your possession all the necessary printed and archival materials. On the other hand, the Berlin office, which is abreast of all the particulars in the trial, could without difficulty place the necessary materials at the disposal of the academic expert and of the person representing my interests — interests which, as must be clear to everyone, coincide with those of the party of Lenin.

I await with equanimity whatever actions you will find incumbent upon yourselves to take.