Politburo And The Church, Kremlin Archives

N. Petrovsky, S.G. Petrov

Conclusion of the Chairman of the Moscow Revolutionary Tribunal M. Beck, Deputy People's Commissar of Justice P. A. Krasikov, Deputy Chairman of the GPU I. S. Unshlikht on the final list of those to be shot in the case of the Moscow clergy and believers. May 14, 1922

No. 24-20 *

May 14, 1922

CONCLUSION .

With regard to the following persons, it is necessary to come to the conclusion that, due to the circumstances of the case and the nature of their personality, there is no data that could affect the mitigation of the judgment of the Moscow Tribunal:

1. Nadezhdin Khristofor, in addition to directly participating in the development of the plan for the anti-Soviet campaign, together with other deans, definitely and consciously led counter-revolutionary agitation under the religious flag, actively called for resistance, delivered sermons of a brightly monarchical direction, inciting religious fanaticism of the masses and open indignation and bloodshed.

2. Sokolov Vasily, not even being a dean, nevertheless in the most active and conscious way conducted direct counter-revolutionary agitation in the church, using the entire religious apparatus of arguments to instill in the heads of his parishioners the idea that the overthrow and sweeping away of the Workers 'and Peasants' government from the face of the earth - there is a task dictated by God and believers must strive for it.

3. Telegin Makariy, as an active implacable enemy of the Workers 'and Peasants' Government and the entire Soviet system, an ardent monarchist, who definitely sees religion and the church as an instrument for overthrowing the Soviet system and confirmed his intransigence at the trial.

4. Sergei Tikhomirov, an active Black Hundred man, who directly took part in the bloodshed, knocking out the crowd, and beating a Red Army soldier on duty with a stone on the head.

5. Zaozersky Alexander, who both revealed in his activities and at the trial itself the greatest of all consciousness and irreconcilability in relation to the Soviet government, its measures and is the ideologist of the counter-revolutionary position of the clergy.

When excluding the remaining 6 persons from the list of 11 sentenced to capital punishment, the commission was guided solely by considerations of the possibility, with the least damage to the essence of the sentence, fair in relation to all 11, to go as much as possible to meet the request of the progressive clergy.

BEK, KRASIKOV, UNSHLICHT ¹⁶ .

14.V.22 g.

- L. 16. Certified typewritten copy made simultaneously with L. 15 (No. 24-25). In the upper right corner there is a typewritten note stating that the document is an appendix to the Politburo resolution, protocol No. 7, item 13 of May 18, 1922 (No. 24-25). Below, under the names, reproduced the resolution of L. D. Trotsky: "I join [.] Trotsky."

- APRF, f. 3, op. 1, d.276, l. 29- Draft minutes of the Politburo meeting. Typewritten original, signatures - autographs in red ink. Below, under the names of those who signed the resolution, L. D. Trotsky in blue pencil: "I join Trotsky." Top left of L. D. Trotsky's litter in the same pencil: "To the Political Bureau." At the bottom it is printed: "6 annexes " - they are not in file 276, apparently, it means documents Nos. 24-14 - 24-19. Below is a stamp about the document's belonging to the office work of the Politburo meeting, minutes No. 7, item 13 of May 18, 1922 (No. 24-25).

Notes and Comments:

The file contains a cover letter on the letterhead of the GPU, sent on May 14, 1922 from the Secretariat of the Collegium of the GPU, signed by I. S. Unshlikht, to the “Politburo of the Central Committee of the RCP Comrade Stalin, comrade Trotsky ":" According to Protocol No. 13 Meetings of the Commission on Values dated May 13 this year I am attaching a conclusion on the case of 11 persons sentenced to capital punishment by the Moscow Revolutionary Tribunal. " The letter is certified by the round official seal of the

GPU. On the letter there are stamps: " Top secret ." " PERSONALLY ". Below is a stamp on the document's belonging to the office work of the Politburo meeting, minutes No. 7, item 13 of May 18, 1922 (No. 24-25). Above is the stamp of the Secret Archive of the Central Committee of the CPSU (b). (L. 18).

^sixteenIn the Central Asia FSB, f. 1, op. 6, d.1, l. 130, a preliminary typewritten copy of the "Conclusion" has been preserved with handwritten revisions, reflecting the selection process among 11 people sentenced to death, candidates for execution. Picked up personally by L. D. Trotsky and approved by the Politburo of the Central Committee of the RCP (b), the troika - M. Beck, P. A. Krasikov and I. S. Unshlikht - on May 13, 1922, prepared a slightly different text of the document required by the highest party authority than that , which was presented at the meeting of the Politburo on May 18, 1922. Immediately after the title, a strictly official list of the contents of the document was given: “On the issue of pardoning 11 persons sentenced to capital punishment, c [azhda] n - in the case of the resistance put up by them when implementing the decision of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee on the confiscation of the church valuables in use by groups of believers to a special fund in the Pomgol Central Committee. Further, a paragraph was typed in capital letters with a discharge of surnames, which, due to the strict and categorical laconicism of the content, could well become a ready-made text of the resolution of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the RCP (b): ROKHANOV ". Then, in five paragraphs, as in the published document of May 14, 1922, short lists of the acts for which the accused were to be shot were given. These lists were based on the guilty part of the verdict of the Moscow Revolutionary Tribunal (No. 24-6), and for each convicted person a kind of clear and specific extract of his "crimes" was made. In the published document (No. 24-20), these paragraphs were edited, apparently, not without the participation of L. D. Trotsky, with the introduction of generalizing ideological clichés of rhetorical nature. So, in the list of accusations of priest Kh. A. Nadezhdin, instead of the "plan for an anti-Soviet campaign" there were earlier "plans of resistance", there was no phrase at all about "counter-revolutionary agitation under a religious flag" and about the "bright monarchist direction" of sermons. The list of actions of priest V. [A.] Sokolov in the original version did not contain phrases about "counter-revolutionary agitation in the church", about the "religious apparatus of arguments", and instead of "Workers 'and Peasants' Power" the phrase "members of the Commission" was used. The list of "crimes" of Hieromonk Macarius (Telegin) previously lacked such ideological cliches as "the enemy of the Workers 'and Peasants' Government and the entire Soviet system", "an ardent monarchist", "an instrument of overthrowing the Soviet system." In the list of "crimes" of the layman S.F. Tikhomirov's changes affected only his social status. The "merchant" and the "butcher shop" disappeared, and an "active Black Hundred" appeared. The last, fifth, paragraph of the document was originally assigned to the layman M.N.Rokhanov. The necessity and obligation of his execution was motivated as follows: "Rokhanov, according to the social position of the wood-worker, because he, leading the crowd and directing its actions, he himself, more energetically than all others, sprinkled stones on the Red Army men." This paragraph in the document has been repeatedly crossed out by hand and below it in the same ink a fragmentary record, finally determining a priest instead of a layman as a candidate for execution: "Zaozersky - took part in the development ...". The reasons for such preferences of the responsible troika and L. D. Trotsky, who joined it, remained unknown. Maybe, here the notorious "proletarian" origin of MN Rokhanov's woodcutter, in contrast to the priest AN Zaozersky, played a role. Making this cynical substitution, the troika fit into a certain PB "limit" - 5 shootings. According to the statement of the troika itself, "the division into two groups" was carried out exclusively on the principle of "the least damage to the essence of the sentence", "fair with respect to all 11." And yet - going "as much as possible to meet the petition of the progressive clergy" to pardon those sentenced. It should be emphasized that in all these petitions it was priest A. N. Zaozersky who was named the first candidate for pardon (No. 2414 - 24-18). According to the statement of the troika itself, "the division into two groups" was carried out exclusively on the principle of "the least damage to the essence of the sentence", "fair with respect to all 11." And yet - going "as much as possible to meet the petition of the progressive clergy" to pardon those sentenced. It should be emphasized that in all these petitions it was priest A. N. Zaozersky who was named the first candidate for pardon (No. 2414 - 24-18). According to the statement of the troika itself, "the division into two groups" was carried out exclusively on the principle of "least damage to the essence of the sentence", "fair in relation to all 11". And yet - going "as much as possible to meet the petition of the progressive clergy" to pardon those sentenced. It should be emphasized that in all these petitions it was priest A. N. Zaozersky who was named the first candidate for pardon (No. 2414 - 24-18).