* We shall cite in addition all the passages of the letters (of the Russian Bureau of the C.C. and of one of the C.C. members operating in Russia) relating to the convocation of the C.C. in Russia:
. . . "We request Comrades Martov and the Menshevik members of the C.C. to communicate to us immediately the names and addresses of the comrades whom they propose to co-opt (the St. Petersburg Mensheviks have refused to do this)". . . . "It is impossible for the time being to convene the Russian collegium: practically no one has agreed to be co-opted, at present only one Bolshevik has agreed, and that conditionally. The Mensheviks (Mikhail, Roman and Yuri ) had categorically refused, considering the work of the Central Committee harmful. The resolutions of the plenum, in the opinion of Mikhail and others, are also harmful. The interference of the C.C. in the spontaneous process of the grouping of Social-Democratic forces in legal organisations that is now taking place is, in their words, like plucking the fruit from the mother's womb after two months' pregnancy. We ask you immediately to indicate to us other comrades to whom we may address a proposal that they should be co-opted. It is also desirable to publish the attitude of the comrades to this behaviour of Mikhail and the others."
Thus the same people who declare in print, with the assistance and approval of Axelrod, Dan, Martov and Martynov, that Plekhanov "falsely calls them 'liquidators'" are directly disrupting the very existence of the C.C. and are proclaiming its existence harmful.
The same people who are exclaiming in the illegal press (through Golos ) and in the legal press (through the liberals) about "the universally known phenomenon of the necrosis of the Party units", are themselves disrupting attempts to put in order, restore and set going these Party units and even such a Party unit as the Central Committee.
Let all Social-Democrats be aware now who the manifesto of Comrades Axelrod, Dan, Martov and Martynov is alluding to when it speaks of "leaders of the legal movement who have now occupied the advanced posts of the militant proletariat". Let all Social-Democrats be aware now who it is that the editorial board of Golos is addressing when it writes: "We should like the comrades [of the type of Mikhail, Roman and Yuri] to appreciate the breach which has been made in the official dogma that has actually condemned the Party organisation to inevitable decay, and to attempt to occupy the positions that have been opened to them [Mikhail, Roman, Yuri and the like] owing to this breach."
We address ourselves to all organisations, to all groups of our Party, and we ask them: do they intend to tolerate this flouting of Social-Democracy? Is it permissible now to remain passive spectators of what is taking place, or is it obligatory for them to undertake a resolute fight against the trend that is undermining the very existence of the Party?
We ask all Russian Social-Democrats: can they now still remain in doubt as to the practical, real political significance of the "theory of equality" of trends, of the equality of the legalists and the illegal Party, of the theory of the fight for legality", etc., etc.?
These theories, these arguments, these loopholes, are the verbal shield behind which are concealed such enemies of Social-Democracy as those like Mikhail, Roman and Yuri, such political accomplices of them as the sixteen Herostratean Mensheviks, such ideological leaders as the literati who conduct the "Voice of the Liquidators ".
And so, No. 19-20 of Golos Sotsial-Demokrata and the splitting manifesto of the four editors of Golos, "To the Comrades", is direct agitation:
for a factional organ against unity,
against unity abroad,
in defence of flagrant liquidationism,
in defence of the downright opponents of the very existence of the C.C.
Against the Party!
The conspiracy against the Party is revealed. Let all to whom the existence of the R.S.D.L.P. is dear come to the aid of the Party!