Marx-Engels |  Lenin  | Stalin |  Home Page

 

Review of the political state of the USSR

 

Review of the political state of the USSR in February 1927

A source: 

Top secret

April 7, 1927

Moscow city

At the same time, an overview of the political state of the USSR for the month of February 1927 is being transmitted. The review was compiled on the basis of data from the state information of the OGPU Inform Department, supplemented by materials from the OGPU departments: Secret (clergy) and Counterintelligence (banditry).

This survey, in view of its top‐secret nature, should be kept on par with the code. Making copies and making extracts is not allowed in any case.

The PP of the OGPU and the heads of the provincial and regional departments of the OGPU can give an overview for reading to the secretaries of the regional committees, provincial committees, regional committees and the Bureau of the Central Committee of the CPSU (b).

When reviewing 5 applications and one table.

Deputy before the OGPU Yagoda

Head of the Information Department of the OGPU Alekseev

WORKERS

The political mood of the workers during the period under review was revealed during the campaign for the re‐election of the Soviets.

The growth in the activity of workers significantly exceeds the activity of other strata of the urban population. Speeches at workersʹ meetings reveal both the political and cultural growth of the working masses.

It should be noted the passive attitude of the unemployed towards reelections and a number of anti‐Soviet speeches at meetings of the unemployed.

The strike movement in February gives a slight increase and reveals mainly the dissatisfaction of certain groups of workers in connection with the conclusion of new collective agreements ¹¹⁴. Dissatisfaction covers groups of skilled metalworkers (lower wages) and textiles (dissatisfaction with the leveling of wages under new contracts). Of the 67 strikes with 5594 members (versus 58 strikes with 4263 members in February), 41 strikes with 3114 members took place in the metal and textile industries.

Metalworkers

Strikes. In February, there was a slight increase in the number of strikes among metalworkers (in February, 12 strikes with 1514 participants versus 6 with 1208 participants in January). The strikes were mainly due to a decrease in wages.

At the Shipyard named after Lenin, 400 workers went on strike because of a reduction in wages by 30 rubles. per month (the decrease is explained by the transfer of the plant to the jurisdiction of Mashinotrest, where prices are lower than in Sudotrest); the factory and the cell did not provide the necessary explanations about the forthcoming decrease in earnings. Individual party members took part in the strike.

230 people were on strike in the Kiev arsenal. It is characteristic that the prices for some work in the arsenal are much lower than the pre‐war prices.

The strike, in connection with the reduction of prices by 50%, took place among the blacksmiths of the transport workshops to them. Petrovsky (Kherson district).

Reduced wages.  A decrease in wages (not only for certain groups of skilled workers, but also for entire workshops) was noted at 32 metal plants in Leningrad, Ukraine and Moscow (in January at 23). The decline led to a number of sharp conflicts and strikes at enterprises. Particularly strong discontent was noted among the workers of large Leningrad factories (15).

In most cases, the administration is reducing wages bypassing new tariff agreements (along with an increase in the 1st category, bonuses are cut, the extra earnings are reduced by 15‐30%, and in some cases up to 50%, new forms of calculating wages are introduced). On this basis, at some factories, there were threats to ʺbeat the administration and take it out in a wheelbarrow.ʺ Relations between the workers and the administration at the Putilov plant, in a number of workshops, became especially aggravated. In the steam shop, two groups of stokers (over 100 people), who were carrying out an ʺItalian” strike ¹¹⁵ due to a 30% reduction in bonuses, threatened to beat the shop manager and take out the manager in a wheelbarrow. labor protection.

In the electrical department, the head of the department ordered that the January earnings not exceed the December one, thereby canceling the increase under a new agreement. In the yard shop, instead of the expected increase of 10 rubles, the workers received only one ruble; summoning the head of the department, the workers said: “Where is the truth, the center increases wages, but we were given a pittance. Our labor, blood‐earned pennies, will be remembered by parasites‐business executives. ʺ Conflicts were also noted in a number of workshops (copper foundry, boiler house, tractor, new smithy). At the Pipe Plant. Kalinin, in connection with the reduction of prices by 30%, among the workers there is talk: ʺWeʹll have to put the appraiser in a sack, smear it with red lead and take it to the river in a wheelbarrow.ʺ

The fact of direct violation of the collective agreement is characteristic. In the workshops of precision instruments. Evdokimov, in one of paragraphs (22) of the new collective agreement, there is a note, according to which the reduction of prices by the administration is recognized as unacceptable. However, the chairman of the Optical and Mechanical Production Trust ordered to lower the prices. The general meeting of workers decided to propose to the Union to immediately seek the implementation of the 22nd clause of the new collective agreement.

Reduction. In February, at a number of metal plants in Ukraine and the Volga region, significant groups of workers (100‐200 people) were laid off. The decline is largely due to a lack of raw materials and orders. A large reduction is carried out at the Izhevsk factories (over 800 people). The plant management and the factory committee made ʺthe decision to fire, first of all, the elderly and workers with poor health.ʺ Reduced ones are examined by a medical commission. Dissatisfaction is intensified by the fact that completely unprovided workers (demobilized, etc.) are being dismissed.

Discontent is being carried out at a number of enterprises (Ukraine) for the disguised reduction (transfer of skilled workers to work in the yard).

At the Krasnaya Zvezda plant (Zinovievsky district), the earnings of skilled workers transferred to unskilled workers dropped from 200 to 40 rubles.

In most factories, workers protesting the layoffs do not object to a shorter work week to prevent layoffs.

Delayed wages. The number of delayed wages in February in the metal industry is half as many as in January (16 versus 30). There is also a halving in the number of long delays (8 versus 15 in January). Delay in wages continues to be noted at the Ural factories (6). At the plant them. Kolyuschenko Uralselmash workers point out that because of the non‐payment of wages, many workers, going to work in the morning, ʺask under the windows.ʺ At the Ust‐Katavsky plant of Yuzhuraltrest, where the salary for the second half of December was issued on January 17 and then only in the amount of 50%, the workers of the blacksmith shop, on their own initiative, convened a meeting, at which there were sharp speeches: dogs, the party does not pay attention to us, but only calms us down with various promises. ʺ The excitement of the workers (1000 people) of the Bytoshevsky plant (Bryansk) does not stop because of the long delay in wages (strikes in November and December 1926 and January and February of this year). The strike in February lasted 5 days (I, 1‐16).

Textile workers

Strikes.  The strike movement among textile workers remains at a high level (29 strikes with 1600 participants against 20 with 1497 participants in January). The strikes continue to cover groups of workers in the main departments and are caused by dissatisfaction with the reduction in wages due to deficiencies in tariffication and the distribution of the leveling fund under the new collective agreement among certain groups of workers. A particularly strong strike movement was noted among the weaving apprentices (factories in the city of IvanovoVoznesensk).

Dissatisfaction with billing.  At ʺmost factories, when drawing up prices, the quality of raw materials, changes in working conditions, and the condition of machines are not sufficiently taken into account, which entails arbitrary fluctuations in wages. At the 1st Republican factory (Kostroma), at B [bolshaya] Dmitrovskaya and Nizhne‐Seredskaya kakh (Ivanovo‐Voznesensk Gubernia), the strikes were caused by a decrease in wages due to the deterioration of the quality of raw materials; the wages of the warders ¹¹⁶ of the 1st

Republican factory decreased by 30%. Two shifts of weavers working on three looms went on strike at the Glukhovskoy district due to a decrease in wages by 5‐10 rubles due to the transition to processing new yarn (marshmallow) ¹¹⁷... The weakness of the tariff work is especially characteristic of the fact that took place in the calico department of the factory of the Proletarskaya m‐ry (Tverskaya province), where the prices after the conclusion of the collective agreement were recalculated three times, which caused sharp discontent among the workers. In connection with the deterioration in the quality of raw materials, the weavers of this factory put forward a demand for an increase in wages, threatening to strike. Workersʹ dissatisfaction intensified due to the fact that the timekeeper, whom they turned to for an explanation of the reasons for the reduction in wages, said that ʺthe calculation of wages is a secret.ʺ The decision of the arbitration commission on the payment to weavers on the average earnings of the deputy. refused to fulfill the director and it was carried out only after the order of the chairman of the trust.

The strike of 100 workers of the weaving and sailing department of the 1st Republican factory occurred as a result of the arbitrary assignment of prices by the administration (without the knowledge of the RKK), which reduced the workersʹ wages. The administration stubbornly refused to pay the workers the average wage, although this was stipulated by the collective agreement.

Strike movement among apprentices.  In early February, in connection with the conclusion of new witchcraft thieves, in the mountains. In Ivanovo‐Voznesensk, an organized performance of apprentices from 6 factories (NIVM, BIVM, ʺRab‐Kraiʺ, ʺZaryadyeʺ, B. Dmitrovskaya and Staro‐Dmitrovskaya districts) took place. The strike mood also seized the apprentices of a number of factories in the districts of the IvanovoVoznesensk province. In addition, the strike was noted at the factory. Vagzhanov, Tver province. Individual members of the CPSU (b) took part in the strikes. The strike movement of apprentices did not meet with support among the bulk of the workers and the apprentices started to work on the same conditions.

Only in isolated cases strikes of apprentices (named after Markov [f‐ka] ‐ Moscow and Proletarskaya m‐ra ‐ Tver province) were caused by an actual decrease in wages (from 10 to 20 rubles) due to a decrease in the wages of weavers.

Protracted conflicts.  The sharp dissatisfaction of the workers is caused by the delay (for 3‐4 months or more) in resolving their fair demands (in some cases, contrary to the decision of the Center). At the factory ʺZaryadyeʺ, Ivanovo‐Voznesensk province. the resolution of the demands of the workers of the printing and color‐brewing departments to transfer them to individual piecework lasted about 6 months (I, 1726).

Logging workers (January‐February)

Dissatisfaction with low wages. Among the workers in a number of logging regions (Kamuralles, Severoles, Severo‐Kavkazpromles, logging in Siberia, etc.), there is a sharp dissatisfaction of workers with the existing low wages (in some cases 50‐75 kopecks with a 10‐12 hour working day). On this basis, strikes and conflicts were noted. On February 11, 500 workers went on strike in the Tagil district of

Kamuraltrest, demanding an increase in prices by 40‐60%. In the NorthDvinskaya province. a number of groups of lumberjacks working in Severoles organizations applied to their village councils demanding that meetings be convened to discuss the issue of wages. One of these statements (Taryginsky collective) indicates that workersʹ earnings barely reach 50 kopecks. in a day. The statement ends with the words: “We inform all the villages ‐ it is enough for Severoles to scoff at us; despite, that we have concluded an agreement, we put down axes and go on strike, since we cannot even buy bread with our earnings.

ʺ The Taryginsky collective went on strike for a week.

Delayed wages.  Workersʹ dissatisfaction is aggravated by the long delay in wages (in some areas wages have not yet been issued since the beginning of last year). Debt sometimes reaches very significant amounts.

The Volgo‐Kaspiles office has been holding back wages to workers since last year, despite the fact that the workers have writs of execution. There are cases when VICs describe the property of loggers who do not pay the tax. In one of the logging regions of Penzoles (Penza), workers were given moonshine against their wages.

Facts were noted when workers and their families, due to non‐payment of earnings, eat surrogates (logging in the Zalair district of Yuzhuraltrest).

Living conditions.  Irregular delivery of products, their poor quality, sale at a price higher than the market price, as well as poor living conditions are noted in a number of logging areas. At the logging sites of Zhelles (Kuban), timber workers are untimely supplied with food and fodder for horses, live in barracks without stoves, and there is no medical aid. Stomach diseases due to poor water are widespread among the workers of the Alush forestry (Siberia). The barracks where the workers live are two arshins high ¹¹⁸, semi‐dark, not heated, flows from the ceiling. In the woodworking areas of the Sochi region (Sevkavpromles), due to the absence of barracks, workers sleep on straw   under the          open      sky. It    is             characteristic      that        the head. development has agreed with a private person who has a tavern in the area of forestry, on the release of vodka to workers on credit on receipts, which will be paid by the administration with subsequent deduction from their earnings. In this regard, among the workers there is a general drunkenness. The owner of the tavern shortcuts the workers (I, 27‐32).

Other industries

Strikes. In February, there were 26 strikes with 2,480 participants (32 in January with 1,558 participants). Strikes among the workers of Mestran (Sevzapruz and Mospogruz), who took advantage of urgent work in order to achieve higher wages, draw attention to themselves.

Delayed wages. In February, there was a further decrease in the number of delayed wages (68 against 105 in January) and a simultaneous decrease in the number of long delays (32 against 60 in January). Delays in wages are observed mainly in the construction, printing, chemical and food‐flavoring industries. The delay in wages is causing strong discontent among workers. Workers of the Stroyburo (Bashkiria), in connection with the non‐payment of wages, threatened to ʺburn down the executive committee and the financial department.ʺ

Renewal of collective agreements

Defending by business executives items that worsen working conditions and workersʹ pay.  In the course of the renegotiation of collective agreements (January‐February), in a number of cases, the desire of business executives to worsen the terms of the agreements concluded and their stubborn defense of points that worsen working conditions and workersʹ pay was revealed.

The pressure of the administration is especially sharp in the metal industry (mainly in machine‐building plants). At the State Mechanical Plant. Dzerzhinsky (Moscow), the administration insisted on reducing prices by 25% (the decision of the arbitration court established a decrease of 7%). According to the Patronny plant im. Volodarsky (Ulyanovsk), where labor productivity is higher than the pre‐war level and wages are lower, the trust insisted on maintaining the wage fund and increasing the wages of low‐ grade workers ¹¹⁹ by cutting the wages of skilled workers (increasing the rate by 15%). In arbitration, the rate increase is set at 5 ʹ/ 2%, the salary fund is increased by 50,000 rubles.

At the Northern Shipyard (Leningrad), the administration insisted on withdrawing from RKK the right to approve prices and intervene in the issues of dismissal of the workforce, the percentage of extra earnings was proposed to be reduced from 85 to 55 and thereby to cancel the increase. At the Optical Plant (Leningrad), the administration proposed a reduction in prices by 30‐60%.

Delay in renegotiating contracts due to conflicts. As a result, most contracts go through arbitration, and most of the clauses of the new collective agreement are transferred to the arbitrator. On the Mashtrest (Leningrad) agreement was not reached on 40 paragraphs out of 62. The tariff part was almost entirely rejected by the trust. At the Severnaya Shipyard (Sudotrest, Leningrad) no agreement was reached on 53 out of 83 paragraphs. At the Elektrougli plant (ETCR, Moscow), 50 paragraphs were classed. Moreover, business executives did not agree to an increase in wages for low‐grade workers. At the Oktyabrskaya factory Mossukno (Moscow), 30 out of 42 paragraphs are in conflict, at the Resurrection silk‐winding factory of Shelkotrest (Moscow), out of 42 paragraphs, 36 are in conflict. Hence the delay in renegotiating collective agreements, reaching in some cases 4‐5 months, irritating the workers

At the Tula arms and cartridge factories, where the renegotiation of the collective agreement drags on for the 4th month, the discontent of the workers (especially the low‐ranking workers) was revealed in a series of sharp attacks against the Union and the administration.

“Our Union is acting in concert with the business executives, they have wiped out the collective agreement and we have nothing to count on now for an increase” (rental workshop), “it turns out as if our representatives went to America, where they have to argue and sue, we have nothing to argue with, we are the owners ʺ(Bullet‐sleeve workshop). “Our Union is being towed by business executives” (a speech by a member of the factory committee at a plant‐wide conference of the Cartridge Plant). “There is a lot of bureaucracy in our Union of Metalworkers, we need to re‐elect the entire board of directors every three months” (bayonet workshop of Oruzhzavod).

“Previously, it was possible to reach an agreement with the capitalist director, he would give or refuse, but he will do it at least soon” (Cartridge Plant).

In connection with the renegotiation of the collective agreement of the pre‐order committee of the Krasnogvardeets plant (Voenprom, Leningrad), he spent 65 days in Moscow; TVO Izhevsk] district committee ‐ 2 _1/2 months.

The mood of certain groups of workers in connection with the abnormalities revealed during the campaign. The irreconcilable position of business executives on the terms of new contracts, the tendency to pass clauses reducing wages, and the implementation of these clauses even before the approval of new contracts (Leningrad, Central Industrial Region) caused workers to disbelieve in the implementation of their demands. At the Optical Plant (Leningrad), after the business executives refused to make any concessions in the tariff part of the collective agreement, some of the workers left the meeting, and no one came to the second meeting. The passive attitude of workers to the discussion of new contracts, revealed in some plants, is also due to the fact that business executives in a number of cases violated the collective agreement, reducing, contrary to the accepted conditions, the workersʹ wages. Moreover, the trade organizers often did not provide them with the proper resistance. ʺThe plant management wants what, it does with us and does not take into account any agreements” (Frunze Iron‐Rolling Plant, Artemovsk). For a number of workers, the renegotiation of collective agreements is being created as a trade between the administration and the Union, where each side tries to ʺcheatʺ and ʺdemand.ʺ At the Krasny Avtogen plant, where the plant manager proposed increasing the 1st grade from 16 rubles 75 kopecks up to 17 rubles, and the factory committee insisted on 20 rubles, the workers say: ʺThey asked a little, it would be necessary to request not 20, but 24 rubles, then the manager would have agreed to 20 rubles.ʺ

Deterioration of working conditions and pay for certain groups of workers.  According to the newly concluded agreements, certain groups of workers (mainly in the metal, mining, food industry and communal services) receive worsening working conditions and wages.

In the metal industry, at a number of enterprises (Leningrad, Moscow, Ukraine, the Volga region), according to new collective agreements, the earnings of skilled workers (increase in norms and decrease in prices) have been cut mainly in order to tighten up low‐grade workers, and a number of facts indicate an exaggeration made during this event. At the Krasny Fakel plant of Mashtresta (Moscow), according to a new collective agreement, the prices should be reduced (up to 20%) for 350400 workers, while the group to be brought up does not exceed 30 people.

In the mining industry (Kuzbass, central and coal‐mining regions), there was serious dissatisfaction with the inclusion in the new collective agreement of clauses on increasing production rates (up to 10%) and on introducing an 8‐hour working day for a number of groups of workers (drywall workers, haul trucks, etc.) Some of the party members are also gripped by discontent.

Dissatisfaction with the working conditions of the new collective agreements in the textile industry is caused by a number of mistakes made in the distribution of the increase in wages; dissatisfaction was aggravated (and in a number of individual cases was entirely conditioned) by the insufficient work of trade organizations to clarify the new agreements, the tariff part of which in most cases suffered from confusion and ambiguity.

In February, in connection with the renegotiation of collective agreements, there were strikes of significant groups of workers (100‐200 people ‐ Glukhov factory named after Lenin ‐ Moscow, factory ʺKrasny Perekopʺ ‐ Yaroslavl, factory named after Khalturin ‐ Leningrad), insignificant groups of workers went on strike in Kostroma and Ivanovo‐Voznesensk.

The lengthening of the working day (from 6 to 8 hours) and the reduction of vacations (from one month to two weeks) for certain categories of workers in the food industry (Moscow, Vladimir, SKK) and communal workers (Moscow) cause significant discontent among these groups of workers (I, 3317).

RE‐ELECTION OF CITIES

Workers

Attendance at re‐election meetings.  The activity of the working masses in the current election campaign has far exceeded the activity of other groups of the urban population. The average attendance at reelection meetings by workers exceeded 80% (in some cases 90% or more). The greatest activity is noted among metalworkers and workers of large enterprises.

Along with the facts of high activity of workers, in some cases a passive attitude towards re‐elections is revealed (mainly in textile factories and small enterprises). The passivity of workers in factories is characteristic, where serious discontent of workers took place on an economic basis (Ural Plant named after Kolyuschenko and Botkin Plant ¹²⁰).

Criticism of the work of city councils.  The criticism of the work of the city councils was mostly of a purely business nature. The question of lowering prices, combating bureaucracy, rationalizing and strengthening housing construction was widely put forward. The workers demanded attention to the improvement of urban outskirts. Workers were worried about unemployment, prostitution and homelessness. It raises the question, indicating a significant cultural growth of the working masses (cheaper books requirements, expansion of the school network, increasing the pay of doctors, device Reds over ¹²¹ “instead of beer,ʺ the spread of discounted tickets to the theater, and so on. N.).

Opposition speeches.  Speeches of a sharply oppositional and antiSoviet character were sporadic and focused mainly on economic issues. Several demagogic attacks were directed against the ʺdictatorship of the partyʺ (in Moscow, Bukharinsky trampark, Novotkatskaya factory of the Moscow cotton trust (Serpukhovsky district), Kulakov factory (Leningrad), Spinning mill No. 2 of Gostrest ‐ Ivanovo‐Voznesenskaya province., carriage workshops ‐ the city of Tula, some factories in the Urals). There was no support for such speeches from the meetings.

In the enterprises of Leningrad, of the number of workers who spoke out sharply at re‐election meetings, a significant percentage falls on party members and Komsomol members (10 out of 38 speeches). These speeches reflected the sentiments of the most backward groups of workers (egalitarianism, peasant sentiments, anti‐Semitism). “The wages of workers are very low compared to the pre‐war level. The peasants are still in a worse position since their products are completely devalued. Unskilled workers are completely deprived of human conditions of existence” (Speech by a member of the CPSU at the Horseshoe Factory). ʺIt is necessary to equalize wages so that all workers receive the sameʺ (speech of a member of the CPSU at a meeting of the City of Venture).

ʺThe campaign to reduce prices has not yielded any results, the economy is being carried out at the expense of the workersʺ (speech by the candidate of the CPSU at the State Electricity Station).

At a number of enterprises, the party members opposed the candidates approved by the cell (5 facts).

A characteristic fact is when a party member who opposed the candidacies of the collective of the CPSU was promoted to the Council, however, after his exclusion from the CPSU, the workers were removed from the composition and replaced by a non‐party member (Pechatny Dvor, Leningrad).

Rejection of candidacies of responsible party and Soviet workers and business executives.  At a number of enterprises (Leningrad, Moscow), individual workers made assignments to workers of the party and Soviet apparatus, as ʺstrangersʺ, ʺnot associated with this enterprise.ʺ

At the f‐ke them. Khalturin (Leningrad), rejections were made to the department of the city district committee and the pre‐district executive committee of the SGR, at the ʺElectricʺ plant a candidate for the department of the Petrograd district committee was rejected, at the Kolomensky plant (Moscow) ‐ the candidacy of the secretary of the plant‐wide committee.

However, the bulk of the workers rebuffed such guild sentiments. The facts of failures of the proposed candidates are rare and are explained by the unsuccessful selection and unauthority of individual candidates of party members. The rejections of candidates for business executives were more numerous (they were noted mainly at textile enterprises), and some of the candidates failed. At the f‐ke ʺOctober Revolutionʺ (Leningrad) the candidacy of assistant. director, at the factory ʺKrasnaya Threadʺ ‐ the candidacy of the director was opposed by the meeting as a working stove‐maker. After a 2‐hour debate, the director was dismissed. The failure of the directorʹs candidacy was also noted at the Krasny Tkach factory. At a metal plant, in a number of departments, the candidacy of the chairman of the Mashtrest failed.

Opposing individual candidates for business executives, the workers pointed to bureaucracy, rudeness, separation from the masses, and mismanagement of work at enterprises (II, 1‐25).

Unemployed

The percentage of attendance at re‐election meetings among the unemployed is very low (in Leningrad ‐ 23%, in Tula ‐ 13.20%, in Moscow a significant part of the unemployed refused to receive a summons ‐ out of 192,934 unemployed people took summons only 15,650). At the same time, the activity of the meeting participants was quite high.

At a number of meetings, speeches with an anti‐Soviet flavor took place, some speeches were in the nature of a call for the surrender of the economic and political positions of Soviet power. At a meeting of unemployed metalworkers (Moscow), in one of the speeches, a demand was put forward for a change in policy towards private capital: “The Soviet government does not allow private production to develop, this contributes to an increase in unemployment. Monopoly of production ‐ Jewish policy”. At a meeting of unemployed metalworkers in the Vyborg District (Leningrad), shouts were heard: ʺDisperse the Union, long live the new bourgeoisie.ʺ At a meeting of unemployed metalworkers in the Petrograd region, one unemployed person declared: ʺWe do not need either the Unions or the government.ʺ At a meeting of unemployed printers (Leningrad), speeches were made to demand “freedom of the press; when there is freedom of the press, there will be work ʺ,ʺ there is less unemployment abroad, since there is freedom of the press. ʺ Sharp protests among the unemployed were also noted in Tula. When voting for candidates at a meeting of the unemployed, there was a fundamental reluctance to vote for Communist candidates. A number of facts of failure of party membersʹ candidates were noted. From the unemployed of Leningrad, 37 opposition and anti‐Soviet people were elected to the Soviet. Of the 61 meetings, 12 candidates proposed by the presidium were rejected and the unemployed nominated “their” candidates to replace them (II, 26‐

32).

Intelligentsia

Attendance at re‐election meetings averages 35‐40%. There were no open harsh speeches, but there were backstage talks about the lack of democracy in elections, the need for freedom of the press, etc. At a meeting of students at the Technological Institute (Leningrad), a note was submitted to the presidium: special executioners, what payment they receive for this, monthly or from each head. ʺ Among the professors (Kharkiv), there was some talk about the need to sabotage the elections. Cases of preliminary agitation against party candidates were revealed. Doctors in the mountains were especially active. Leningrad, seeking to hold ʺtheirʺ candidates. On several occasions, after their lists fell through, groups of doctors defiantly left meetings.

Cases of failure of candidates nominated by the collectives of the CPSU (b) took place mainly at meetings of school workers in the mountains. Leningrad. Separate groups were actively campaigning for the failure of party candidates, teachers bypassed schools, urging to elect only non‐party members. As a result, at a meeting of the 52nd, 53rd, 54th and 55th group committees and the 93rd and 94th local committees of the Rabpros (Leningrad), the entire lists of the collective of the All‐Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks and the trade union activists were failed, and non‐party members were elected. Some facts of failure of party candidates took place in the elections in scientific institutions. In Novocherkassk, at a meeting of scientific workers, the candidacy of a member of the All‐Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks was failed, and only non‐party members were elected. One of the professors, when announcing the order, said: ʺWe should not impose an order, since we are not communistsʺ (II, 33‐37).

Unorganized population

The attendance of re‐election meetings by the unorganized population is mostly weak (on average, up to 20‐25%). In some cases, meetings were disrupted (Center, Ural, SKK). In some cities in the North Caucasus, attendance at meetings fell to 5%.

The groupings were revealed among the unorganized population of the North Caucasus (5 groups), three groups among the sectarians (Vladikavkaz city). Their social composition: cabbies, small artisans, artisans and merchants. (The former Socialist‐Revolutionary group belongs to one of the groups.) The other two groups consist of kulaks, and one is organized under the leadership of a former Menshevik and a former white officer and is campaigning for ʺnomination to the Soviet of his ownʺ (Kursk Slobodka in Vladikavkaz). In the mountains. In Kislovodsk, the group organized subgroups for direct leadership and communication   with       the          population          during the          reelection. Campaigning is conducted under the slogan: ʺCity councils without communistsʺ (11, 33).

 PEASANTRY

Re‐election of village councils

In February, the election campaign ends in most districts and elections to village councils are widely launched. The campaign reveals the decisive importance that the preliminary work of local party organizations and election commissions had on the further course of the re‐election of the Soviets, in particular work among the poor and on deprivation of voting rights. Highlights of the campaign

Work to organize the poor.  Work among the poor, delivered in the current election campaign, at a rate well above that of last year, has had a significant impact on energizing the poor in elections. The work of Party organizations often covered almost all or most of the poor. So, in the Nizhny Novgorod province. in 37 villages of Epiphany parish. Poor meetings covered 75% of the poor, in the Smolensk province. on Ponizovskaya Vol. ‐ 90%, along Izdeshkovskaya parish. 67 meetings were attended by 957 out of 1300 poor, 268 poor people were held in 10 districts of the Novosibirsk District, with the presence of up to 60‐65% of the poor; in Minusinsk district, 324 meetings of the poor were held, attended by 30,000 people; in the Smolensk district of the Biysk district ‐ 65 meetings, etc. (III, 1‐8).

Deficiencies in work among the poor (isolation from the middle peasants, the kombedov bias, ¹²², on the one hand, and the dissolution of the poor in the middle peasants, on the other) are due to insufficient leadership of this work on the ground, especially in the village councils. At the same time, the middle peasants were sometimes left outside the leadership. This was especially evident in Ukraine, where preparations for re‐elections were carried out almost exclusively through the KNS (III, 9‐17).

Work to deprive electoral rights.  The work on depriving the electoral rights was of no less importance for the course of the elections. The application of the instructions on the ground led to the actual elimination from the elections of the main enemy of the poor peasants ‐ the kulaks and anti‐Soviet elements in the countryside. However, in some places the poor, sharpening the class struggle against the kulaks in the agricultural election commissions, often deprived of the electoral rights and significant groups of peasants who could not be classified as exploitative and were completely loyal to the Soviet regime (III, 18‐22).

The poor composition of rural and volost election commissions.  Such excesses were due in part to the predominantly poor composition of election commissions. In rural and especially volost election commissions, a significant part of their members were party members and Komsomol members. And in some cases, the electoral commissions were composed exclusively of party members. The composition of 17 volost election commissions of the Vladimir province. and the district included only 15 non‐party people, the remaining members of the commissions (104 people ‐ members and candidates of the All‐Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks and the Komsomol. 3 members of the Komsomol and 2 non‐party members In Ukraine, the composition of the electoral commissions is almost exclusively poor, the middle peasants in the electoral commissions constituted an insignificant minority, and in some places were completely absent.

Excessive deprivation of election rights.  A relatively large number of cases of improper deprivation of the middle peasants from election rights occurs in Ukraine, the North Caucasus and Siberia. Most often, mistakes were made in relation to the middle peasants ‐ the employers of farm laborers and owners of agricultural machinery. In Ukraine, along with the deprivation of the electoral rights of peasants with permanent farm laborers, the middle peasants who use farm laborers seasonally, cultural owners, as well as middle peasants with large agricultural implements and even poor peasants who own agricultural implements were often deprived of their voting rights. Among other mistakes in compiling lists of ʺdisenfranchisedʺ in Ukraine, affecting the middle peasants (and even in some cases the poor), it should be noted that the deprivation of electoral rights without taking into account the social status of the rank and file of the white armies who got to the whites after mobilization, the former rank and file Makhnovists¹²³ (already amnestied) and peasants who were engaged in trade before the revolution. Errors in compiling the lists of ʺdisenfranchisedʺ in Ukraine led in places to the deprivation of electoral rights for a disproportionately large percentage of voters. So, in the Kharkov district in some village councils, up to 27% of voters are deprived of votes, in the Melitopol district in the village. The great of 8,000 voters disenfranchised 4,000.

In the North Caucasus, the formal attitude towards groups employing hired labor was reflected primarily in the middle peasant. In a number of places, there were cases of gross misapplication of instructions, when peasants and Cossacks were deprived of their electoral rights for hiring seasonal workers. The families of the Red Army and the Terarmy lost their voices and ¹²⁴who are forced to resort to hired labor due to a decrease in the number of workers after family members leave for the army (5 districts of the Shakhtinsko‐Donetsk district, some areas of the Tersk and Taganrog districts). In the Don and Kuban districts, persons who directly or indirectly participated in the civil war on the side of the whites, without taking into account their loyalty to the Soviet regime and public activity, were classified under the heading of ʺdisenfranchisedʺ. All of this has led, in some cases, to a very high percentage of those deprived of the right to vote. So, in the Donskoy district in the stc. Kanelovskaya, Starominskiy district, was deprived of election rights for 25% of voters. In some village councils of the Kushchevsky district of the same district, 20‐25% of voters are deprived of their rights. In the Kuban district in the stc. Staro‐Grishkovskaya was deprived of election rights of 520 people, which exceeds the last yearʹs number of ʺdisenfranchisedʺ by almost 10 times.

It should also be noted that the facts of mass deprivation of the electoral rights of the German colonists are characteristic of Ukraine and the North Caucasus. So, in the Mariupol district of Ukraine, in the German colonies, 30% of voters are deprived of election rights (and in some places even higher). On the part of the ʺdisenfranchisedʺ colonists of Ukraine, there were statements that ʺone cannot live in a state without having any rights.ʺ In the Taganrog district of the North Caucasus, the Kamyshan electoral commission has deprived an entire German colony of electoral rights and recorded cases of deprivation of 20 to 43% of voters in 4 colonies. In the Don district in the Vorontsovskaya colony, out of 334 voters, 290 people have been deprived of their rights, in connection with which 30 families are going to go to America.

Characterized by a sharp increase in the number of ʺdisenfranchisedʺ in all districts of Siberia. In total, according to partial information, in 18 Siberian districts in rural areas 76,958 people were deprived of election rights this year, against 14,514 people last year. In some constituencies, it is deprived of electoral rights: in the Omsk district 6026 (against 1398 people), Rubtsovsky ‐ 6136 people (against 1001), in the Slavgorodsky district ‐ 5706 (against 701), in Kamensky ‐ 6418 (against 588), in Biysk ‐ 8475 (against 1470), in Minusinsk ‐ 4201 (against 643), etc. Errors in relation to the middle peasants, who were included in the lists of ʺdisenfranchisedʺ most often under the heading of ʺemployersʺ, are characterized by data for the Khakass District, for 9 districts of the Krasnoyarsk District, two districts of the Kamensk District, for 7 districts of the Achinsky District and for 18 districts of the Novosibirsk District,

It should be noted that at the beginning of the campaign, the mistakes of the agricultural election commissions were not always properly corrected in the higher authorities. So, in Ukraine, where a significant number of ʺdisenfranchisedʺ have appealed against the decisions of the agricultural electoral commissions, the higher authorities cancel a very small number of decisions of the agricultural electoral commissions. In the North Caucasus, the district electoral commissions did not always take measures depending on them to eliminate the formal approach to deprivation of electoral rights on the part of the electoral commissions and to correct the mistakes made by the latter. In Siberia, in a number of districts, there was even some pressure on the lower election commissions from the higher authorities in the sense of demanding an increase in the number of ʺdisenfranchisedʺ. In some districts of Siberia, a sharp increase in the number of ʺdisenfranchisedʺ occurred after the field trips made by authorized regional executive committees and RECs, where they encouraged sellezbirkami to expand the lists. According to the report of the Tonkin District Election Commission, the Kuznetsk Regional Election Commission issues a resolution: ʺImmediately take measures to finally identify the deprived of election rights.ʺ In the Kamensk district, an authorized representative of the election commission, when discussing the list of ʺdisenfranchisedʺ, said: ʺEmployers should be deprived of the right to vote, regardless of whether they are middle peasants or well‐to‐do; employers of seasonal workers who, at a certain time, hire, at the time of harvesting bread or herbsʺ (III, 23‐26).

Re‐election progress Increase in attendance at election meetings

The influence of the above‐mentioned factors in the course of the elections was reflected in a certain regrouping of the forces competing in the elections. This is reflected in a significant increase, in comparison with previous re‐elections, in the activity of the poor in elections, sometimes due to a decrease in the activity of the middle peasantry. The re‐elections are taking place with an increased percentage of attendance at election meetings in most regions of the Union against last year. So, in Moscow province, the attendance of election meetings is expressed on average at 58% (against 53.2% last year), in AKSSR ¹²⁵ in 5 counties from 45 to 60%, in the Cherepovets province. (in 5 counties) ‐ from 58 to 67%, in the Novgorod province. (for 859 village councils) from 45 to 55%, in the Smolensk province. (in 8 districts) from 44 to 72%, etc. In Ukraine, in 695 village councils (94 districts), the average attendance at meetings is 56.5%, reaching in some cases 70‐90%. In the North Caucasus, 45.4% of 200 village councils participated in the re‐

elections. In Siberia, in 11 districts (data cover 1361 village councils), the attendance rate reaches 50.3%, in some districts, the attendance rate is much higher (Kuznetsk district ‐ 53.8%, Oirot region ‐ 61.5%, Khakass district ‐ 60, 4%, Novosibirsk ‐ 53%, etc.). The smallest turnout percentage is given by the Minusinsk District (40%).

A slight decrease in the participation of the population in the elections compared to last year was noted in the Tver province. (48.6% versus 51.6%), Vologda province. (in 11 volosts of Kargopolsky district) attendance at re‐election meetings ranges from 14 to 32%, in some cases dropping to 8%.

The position of individual groups in the village in the elections is drawn as follows.

Election Poor

Revitalization of the poor. If in the last campaign, as a rule, the leading figure in the poor‐middle peasant bloc was the middle peasant, then in the current campaign in a number of regions (Ukraine, the North Caucasus, Siberia) the leading role is shifted to the organized poor. The activation of the poor is reflected, first of all, in its significant interest in poor meetings, which are attended by 50‐60% of the entire poor, and in some places up to 80‐90% and more. The attendance of the poor at preelection and election meetings is significantly higher than last year, and in some places the poor at the meetings prevail even over other groups of voters. So, in the Samara province. in Bogdanovskaya parish. Previously, the poor almost never attended gatherings, but now everybody goes to re‐election meetings. In some districts of the Urals (Shadrinsky, Chelyabinsky), in some places the poor at reporting meetings accounted for 50‐60% of all those present. In Siberia, in the Biysk district, on average 44% of voters were present at the polling stations in the re‐elections of the Srostinsky village council, while the poor participated in the re‐elections by 100%. In Minusinsk district, in 200 village councils, 356 pre‐election meetings were attended by 38560 voters, of which 19617 were poor, 15440 were middle peasants, 1475 were wealthy, 456 party members, 468 Komsomol members and others (employees, intelligentsia, etc.) ‐ 1104.

The activity of the poor in most cases is quite healthy and is aimed at isolating the kulaks and their supporters in elections. In some cases, when trying to convene independent meetings of the poor, the poor spoke out against the isolated meetings of the poor, fearing the aggravation of relations with the middle peasants: extremely poor gatherings can lead to what happened in the years of the revolution, when the poor were at enmity with the middle peasants” (Komi‐

Zyryansk oblast) (III, 37‐40).

ʺCombedovskyʺ moods. At the same time, the growth in the activity of the poor in a number of regions, especially in Ukraine, caused a revival of the Kombeda sentiments, expressed in tendencies to bypass the middle peasant in the elections. This manifested itself in particular in the desire to create extremely poor Soviets. At the meetings of the poor, statements are not uncommon: ʺWe do not need the middle peasants, since they will defend their interests, we only need such a council that would protect the interests of the poor,ʺ etc. In the Glukhov district in the village. The cellars of the poor said: ʺIf the poor are in the village council, then the business is reliable, but for the sake of appearance you can lead a couple of middle peasants.ʺ In the Republic of Moldova, at the re‐elections of the Wadsturkovo village council, the poor declared: “When the majority of the middle peasants were in the village council last year, the KNS members had to gather in the back streets, all the benefits were given by the Soviet government to the middle peasants and the wealthy, and the poor were in the corral, now we will not be fools and will prove that the power in the village should belong to us. ʺ In the Nikolaevsky district in the Kalinovsky village council, the poor, strenuously preparing for the re‐elections, declare: ʺOne more moment has fallen out to take power into our own hands and we need to use this moment.ʺ In some places, especially in Ukraine, such sentiments found support in the person of some workers in the lower Soviet apparatus. Characteristic is the statement of a member of the Tomakovsky VIK of the Zaporozhye District at a meeting of peasants of the Ilyinsky Village Council: “Last year, the government gave wide democracy, as a result of which the middle peasants and kulaks entered the government, and the poor were removed from power and they were in the tail. Therefore, this year the question arose about the need to bring the poor to the authorities, and let the wealthy and middle peasant lag behind. ʺ

This tendency to wipe out the middle peasant was most clearly manifested when candidates were nominated for village councils at poor peasantsʹ and pre‐election meetings, when mostly poor peasants were nominated for new Soviets (Samara province, Ukraine, Siberia). In the Priluki Okrug, some rural women and KNS nominated 75% of the poor, 5% of the middle peasants, and 20% of women in the new Soviets. In the Samara province. in 6 villages of Berezovo‐Luki vol. Pugachevsky u. At the meetings of the poor, 154 candidates were nominated to the village councils, at which 62% of the poor and 38% of the middle peasants were nominated. In the Novosibirsk district, 6570% of the candidates nominated to the village councils at the poor peasantsʹ meetings are poor peasants, while the rest are middle peasants (III, 41‐47).

The facts of the passivity of the poor in the current campaign are noted as a rarer phenomenon and are most often explained by the weak work of the party members and public organizations in the village or the material dependence of the poor on the wealthy and the kulaks (partially noted in Bryansk, Orenburg provinces, Urals, etc.).

Most often, the passivity of the poor is reflected in the unwillingness to work in the Council, due to the low wages of the workers of the Village Council and the unwillingness to “undermine their economy” (III, 4852).

The position of the middle peasants in the re‐election

The middle‐poor block. AT In most districts of the Union, the bulk of the middle peasants in the re‐elections are in a bloc with the poor, which was largely facilitated by the widespread work of organizing the poor. Along with this, as a result of the activation of the poor, the role of the middle peasantry in the current campaign changes somewhat compared to the previous campaign. If at that time the middle peasants played a dominant position in the elections and led the poor, then this year the leading role belongs to a large extent to the poor and the leadership of the middle‐poor bloc is in the hands of the latter. This is clearly manifested in the conduct of lists presented at the poor peasantsʹ meetings, which in most cases are held with the organized support of the middle peasants, as well as in speeches against the candidates of the kulaks and the wealthy. The regrouping of forces in the elections is most typical for areas with the sharpest stratification of the countryside (Ukraine, the North Caucasus, Siberia and some other areas), where the campaign unleashed the activity of the poor against the wealthy kulak groups in the countryside. For a significant number of other districts, especially the Center, the activity of the middle peasant is not less, and sometimes even more than that of the poor (III, 53‐56).

Independent performances of the middle peasants. The excesses allowed in the preliminary work for re‐election in the direction of depriving some of the middle peasants of electoral rights and wiping out the middle peasants from the new Soviets, although they did not cause sharp opposition from the middle peasants, nevertheless in some places caused a certain departure from the poor peasants. At re‐election meetings, it is not uncommon for the middle peasantry to speak out against the lists of candidates prepared jointly by the party cells and the poor, especially harsh where the middle peasants were included in the lists in an insignificant number or were not included at all. In Ukraine, there were facts when the middle peasants, in the form of a protest against the pressure of the poor peasants, took part in the elections on their own, dropping the poor peasantsʹ lists or (much less often) following the kulaks; in these cases, the poor entered the Soviets in insignificant numbers or did not even enter the Soviets at all. It is characteristic that, speaking in elections independently,

In some cases, middle peasant groups take part in elections. So, for example, in the Arkhangelsk province. a group of middle peasants spoke out, which set as its goal to disrupt the list put forward by the cell and the poor, for the following reasons: ʺthe poor, being in the village council, will not help the middle peasants, they will rather do harmʺ (III, 57‐80).

A bloc of middle peasants with well‐to‐do and kulaks.  The facts of blocking the middle peasants with the wealthy in the current campaign are relatively rare. This is also noted in Ukraine, where in a number of districts the wiping out of the middle peasants in the elections was especially noticeable. Most often, the performances together with the wealthy middle peasants are explained by the wrong tactics of the poor towards the middle peasants: “there is only one poor peasant on the list, but we, the middle peasants and the well‐to‐do, were let through” (Sverdlovsk District), “the communists deprive the best people of the right to vote, but choose themselves The Soviets opened a wide road for farm laborers and office workers, and even for garbage in the form of delegates, and the middle peasant has no road and no one protects him ”(Trinity District) (III, 81‐87).

The position of the kulaks in the elections

In the course of the re‐elections, a significant change in the tactics of the kulaks in comparison with the elections of last year is evident. The kulaks show significant activity only during the pre‐election campaign, organizing groups, convening illegal conferences and recruiting supporters among the poor and middle peasants. In the elections themselves, the kulak‐prosperous elements, deprived of their leaders in a significant part (as deprived of voting rights), show themselves very weakly.

Re‐election groupings of the kulaks. In February, according to incomplete data (not counting Ukraine), 210 kulak groups were again registered (208 in January), of which 194 arose in connection with the re‐elections of the Soviets. Most of the groupings arose in the Center (80), the North Caucasus (39), the North‐West (25), and so on. In Ukraine, from the beginning of the Soviet re‐election campaign until February 15 of this year. 178 groups were registered; in Moscow province. during the entire re‐election campaign, 78 groups were marked, of which 54 participated in the re‐elections. Most of the groupings consist of kulaks and wealthy people, and only in some cases do they include middle peasants.

If in the previous campaign groups arose during re‐elections, being poorly formed, in the current campaign they are often organized long before the elections themselves, rallying the kulak‐wealthy strata of the village, outlining their candidates and tactics at the elections. Along the Oryol lips. and the Vladivostok district, there were isolated cases of attempts by kulak groups from different villages to communicate with each other to establish contact of actions on a regional or volost scale. Characteristic is a group in the Vladivostok District called ʺPlowmanʺ, which held up to 11 meetings under the slogan ʺSoviets without Communistsʺ. In the North Caucasus, Ukraine, the Urals and the DCK, in a significant number of cases, the groupings included, and in some places were headed by, clearly anti‐Soviet elements (former members of anti‐Soviet parties, former whites, re‐emigrants, churchmen, etc.) (III, 100‐113).

The tactics of the kulaks in the elections.  During the re‐election, when the picture with the deprivation of electoral rights became clear, the position of the kulaks changed dramatically and their activity dropped markedly. In Ukraine, there were cases when kulaks appeared at elective meetings, asking to restore their rights. The kulaks, deprived of their voting rights, are forced to act on the sidelines at the elections. Attention is drawn to the groups of ʺdisenfranchisedʺ noted in Moscow, Oryol provinces, Minusinsk and other districts, which, by means of soldering, bribery, pressure on the poor people who are economically dependent on them, create their own asset through which they carry out their line in the elections. In a number of cases, one of the main goals of the groupings was to achieve their reinstatement in the elections.

Not feeling strong in the elections, kulaks often try to disrupt meetings or distract voters from them under various pretexts (arranging weddings, festivals, etc., using village hooligans). In some cases, they are campaigning against attending re‐election meetings (Voronezh Gubernia, Izyum District, Ukraine, Kuban, North Caucasian Territory).

Struggle against the candidacies of communists and the poor.  At the very election meetings, the kulaks came out with the following slogans: ʺdown with stratificationʺ, ʺfreedom of elections, down with lists, down with impositionʺ and ʺSoviets without communistsʺ. At many meetings, there are speeches demanding a secret ballot (in Moscow province. 25 cases). In their speeches, the kulaks are trying to use the sentiments of a part of the middle peasants against the poor peasants (“idlers”).

Particularly harsh are the actions of the kulaks against the communists, which are often anti‐Soviet in nature: “Communists should not be admitted to the village council, because they follow the line of the party and the Soviet government, and they care little about the peasants, it is better to choose non‐party people. Communists should not be elected to the village council, not only should they not be elected, but as swindlers and scoundrels, they should be cut off; the party of communists consists of scoundrels who rip us off ”(Smolensk province),“ the communists have seized power into their own hands, do what they want, take a lot of tax, describe the last property ‐ why should we vote for them ”(Zlatoust district); ʺCommunists now have no place in the Soviets, they must be replaced by business peasantsʺ

(Irbit District) (III, 88‐99).

The actions of the kulaks in the current campaign are not as successful as they were last year. However, in some cases, the organized kulaks managed to defeat candidates from the party members and the poor and to bring in some of their representatives. In this respect, data on groupings are especially characteristic. Of the 194 groups that took part in the February elections, 72 groups won partial or complete victory, 56 groups were defeated (the results of the struggle of the remaining 66 groups are unknown).

Composition of new village councils

The poor composition of the village councils. Partial election results give a generally favorable picture. Facts about the contamination of the new Soviets by kulaks and elements alien to the Soviet regime are noted less often than last year. The composition of the new Soviets is poor and middle peasants, and the percentage of party members and Komsomol members is higher than last year. However, in some areas, the entire course of the elections led to an abnormal ratio in the composition of the newly elected Soviets of the main strata of the countryside ‐ the poor and the middle peasants. A significant predominance of the poor in the Soviets is observed more often than in other regions, across Ukraine and partly in the North Caucasus and Siberia. Partial data for Kievsky, Belotserkovsky, Berdichevsky, Vinnitsky and Kamenetsky districts of Ukraine give the following ratio between the middle peasants and the poor in the new Soviets: poor people on average from 60.1% to 64%, middle peasants from 21.4% to 34.3%. In the North Caucasus, there are 200 village councils in the Donskoy, Stavropol, Maikop and Taganrog districts out of 5687 elected members of the village councils — 1317 (23% of the members of the CPSU (b) and the Komsomol). Social status of the newly elected:

630 poor peasants, 428 middle peasants, 10 well‐to‐do people were elected in 50 village councils of the Don District;

2347 poor, 1323 middle‐class, 115 well‐to‐do were elected to 108 village councils of the Stavropol district;

354 poor peasants, 215 middle peasants, 6 well‐to‐do people were elected in 30 village councils of the Maikop district;

127 poor, 90 middle peasants were elected in 12 village councils of the Taganrog district.

Up to 80% of the poor passed through a number of village councils of the Stavropol Okrug. In the Irkutsk district (Siberia), out of the total number of members of the village council last year, 36% of the poor were elected, the middle peasants were 52.5%, this year the poor were

39.8%, the middle peasants ‐ 47.8%.

In the Ivanovsky District of the Amur District (DVK), the percentage of the elected poor is 48.3%, the middle peasant is 46.5%, and the wealthy is 5.2%.

Embarrassment of the Soviets. The facts of contamination of the new Soviets by anti‐Soviet elements (former police officers, former white officers, traders and kulaks) are noted much less frequently than last year. In 14 districts of Moscow Gubernia, where the elections have already ended, 8 former Social Revolutionaries, 2 former Mensheviks, 9 former police officers and former White officers, 5 factory owners and 58 anti‐Soviet persons were elected to the newly elected village councils, but in village councils they, as a rule, do not constitute the majority. Isolated cases of partial clogging of the new Soviets are also noted in other regions. A characteristic fact took place in the village. Yekaterinoslavka, Zavitinsky District, Amur District (DVK), where 35% of the wealthy and their henchmen were included in the newly elected village council; at the organizational meeting of the new village council 14 members of the village council (out of 36), kulaks and their supporters, tried to seize the leadership, but in view of the resistance of the re‐election commissioner, they submitted a collective statement to the Zavitinsky district electoral commission, the okrug, and the CEC that the elections were carried out incorrectly and at the organizational meeting ʺpressure was felt from the re‐election commissioner.ʺ An investigation carried out by the election commission later established that this statement was not based on anything and was nothing more than a provocation on the part of the kulaks.

Kulak terror

According to incomplete information, 61 cases of terror were registered in February (30 in January), of which 45 in connection with the reelections of the village councils, 7 murders, one wound, 215 beatings, etc. Terror on the basis of a re‐election campaign is most often directed against election commissions (for deprivation of electoral rights) ‐ 15 cases and against new village councils (5 cases).

In with. Demino of the Cherepovets lips. at an elective meeting, an anonymous note was thrown into the presidium: ʺYou have deprived our guys of election rights, so you should know ‐ we will deprive you of your life for this.ʺ In the village Gokerberg, in the Nemrespublika, ʺdisenfranchisedʺ kulaks posted anonymous proclamations in which they threatened to kill all active workers in the village and threatened to set fire to all who would go to the re‐election of the Council.

Peasantsʹ demands in the elections

Speeches on the reports of the grassroots Soviet bodies and at elective meetings revealed the basic demands and political tendencies of broad strata of the countryside. The greatest attention was drawn to the issues of prices, tax, land management, school construction, medical aid, etc.

Speeches on the issue of agricultural tax.  The poor and middle peasants, in their speeches on the tax issue, point to improper taxation, incorrect distribution of the total amount of tax by timing (ʺthe government has incorrectly established the payment of such a large amount of tax in the first two termsʺ), the severity and inconvenience of the simultaneous collection of tax, arrears on the semester, insurance and other payments.

In some places (Moscow Gubernia, Belarus, the Urals), the poor and middle peasants express dissatisfaction with the taxation of livestock and subsidiary earnings, which is sometimes supported by the wealthy, who suggest (Belarus, the Amur District) to collect tax only on the sown tithe of land. The statements of the wealthy in terms of tax are generally harsher: “the government is robbing taxes,” “the growth of agriculture is halted by heavy taxes,” etc. It should be noted that the resolutions introduced not to tax livestock (Belarus), “consider it correct to impose agricultural tax on only arable land, which when calculating the tax, it should be broken down into categories depending on the yield ʺ(Vladimirskaya gubernia),ʺ allocate large funds for the tax rebate from the poor ʺ(Ivanovo‐Voznesenskaya gubernia)

Presentations on the issue of ʺscissorsʺ.  The issue of ʺscissorsʺ was significantly reflected in the election speeches. Characteristics are proposals in addition to orders (“to equalize the prices for industrial and agricultural products this year”) of the middle peasants of Moscow province, (“the village council must petition the higher authorities to lower prices for urban goods, because the poor have nothing to buy at a high price, and its Soviet should take care of the poor peasants” (the poor peasant of the Oryol province), etc. In speeches, there were sometimes complaints that the Soviet government was deliberately pursuing such a policy in practice in order to build industry on the shoulders of the peasantry and at its expense (middle peasant of Tula province) that ʺthe state accumulates its capital not by increasing production, but by imposing on goods, which has a heavy effect on the peasants.ʺ

Antagonism to the city.  Often, speeches on the scissors issue reflected antagonism towards the city, resulting in complaints about the better economic situation of the workers. “The workers live much better than the peasants. The time will come when we, peasants, will go to break the workersʹ chests, since they live better than the peasants. ʺ ʺThe workers walk cleanly and hold the power in their hands, but our brother workday and night ‐ prepare bread, and give it to the state for a pittance.ʺ ʺA worker is a master, a man is a worker,ʺ etc.

Demands to reduce workersʹ wages and increase the working day.  Specific demands are not uncommon to reduce the wages of workers and employees and to increase the working day. In Voronezh Gubernia, in the 2nd hut of the Uryv settlement of Ostrogozhsky u. the poor man made an addition to the order: ʺto instruct the new composition of the village council to petition the higher authorities to increase the working day of the workers to 12 hours, since the peasants work 16‐18 hours a day.ʺ In the Orenburg province. in with. The NovoTroitsky meeting after the speech of the middle peasant demanded to indicate in the resolution the need to reduce the salaries of some categories of state employees, pointing personally to the speaker.

Other requirements. Other requirements include issues of land management, school construction, medical care and landscaping. The speeches pointed out to the red tape and bureaucracy in the Soviet apparatus, especially in the local authorities, and to the inadequacy of the network of cultural institutions and the funds allocated for improvement. Attention is drawn to the individual requirements for the division of state farms and state fund lands (Voronezh, Kaluga and other provinces). In the Kaluga province. in Meshchersky u. at the reelection meeting of the Sukholomsk District Village Council, the kulak and the middle peasant, on behalf of the election commission, proposed an extensive mandate, which, by the way, reads: ʺThe Soviets systematically turn the middle peasant into a kulak, and a bummer into a poor peasant.ʺ State farms, state funds and other profitable items of the state have an unpleasant effect on the peasantry and even murderously. often remained in the former landownersʹ nests and were located within the boundaries of peasant settlement. These profitable articles of the state suggest to the peasant that the latter could have won everything from the landowner, not everything from the state, and therefore it is necessary to annul the above and hand it over to the peasantry (the language of the order suggests that the order was drawn up by an intellectual).

Cross unions

In February, in 39 provinces and districts (with the exception of Ukraine, where 145 appearances for the Constitutional Court were recorded in 26 districts from January 15 to February 1), 246 cases of agitation for the cross unions were again noted, against 229 in January. Of all the speeches, 109 took place at pre‐election and elective meetings, at the regional congresses — 11 (in Moscow province) and 2 speeches at the organizational plenums of the RIK and VIK. There are 35 (14%) demands of the Constitutional Court, which are of a political nature, 71 (29%) of peasant trade unions, 47 (19.5%) for price regulation, etc. The Constitutional Court is often thought of as organizations called upon to fight against the dictatorship of the proletariat and for the establishment of a ʺpeasant dictatorshipʺ (Oryol, Leningrad Gubernia, Donetsk District) and which ʺcan be opposed to the partyʺ (Salsky District, North Caucasian Territory). In the Oryol province. middle peasant,¹²⁶ and the Council of Nationalities ¹²⁷. The speech of the former policeman in the Moscow province is characteristic: ʺThe Krestsoyuz will have to make a coup and take power into its own hands, the purpose of the union will be to convene the Constituent Assembly.ʺ In the Sretensky district in the village. Novo‐Troitsky, in contrast to the working party cell among the poor, the prosperous created an illegal peasant union, which included the wealthy, and also partially the middle peasants and the poor. However, this union, given the great authority among the population of the party cell, did not actively act. In some places, the prosperous and the kulaks, who were in favor of the cross unions, received due rebuff from the poor. In the village. V. Yablokovo, Voronezh province. a poor man spoke out against the kulak agitating for the Constitutional Court, declaring that ʺthe union will only be useful to the fists, and it will hit the poor in the face.ʺ

War rumors

In recent months, rumors about the imminence of war have intensified in almost all regions of the Union, especially in the border areas. As a result of this, among some part of the urban and rural population, a panic mood was created, which was expressed in the increased purchase of basic necessities (salt, flour, kerosene, sugar, etc.). Similar sentiments were noted in a number of industrial areas. At a number of enterprises in the Moscow province. workers strenuously procured salt, sugar, bread, etc., often creating long queues in the cooperative shops. In the mountains. Yuzha, Ivanovo‐Voznesensk province. The southern EPO sold 25,000 poods of flour in a few days in February (against 14,000 poods in December and 8,000 poods in the first half of

January); more significant was the panic in the village. In m. Pochary Starodubsky u. Bryansk province, rumors about the war caused an increased demand for salt, which the peasants buy for 5‐7 poods; in Ushonskaya parish. Klinsky u. peasants buy salt in bags of 5‐10 poods.

Similar facts have been noted in a number of other provinces (Tula, Ryazan, Orel, Tambov) and districts (Lugansk, Nikolaev, etc.). In a number of regions of the Center and Ukraine, private traders, taking advantage of the increased demand for basic necessities, inflated prices, and in some places (Tula, Ryazan provinces) traders sold salt and other essential goods in limited quantities and only with the obligatory purchase of other goods. In the border regions, especially in the Ukraine and in the DCK, rumors of the war sparked talk of a fall in the exchange rate of the chervonets and Soviet money in general. There were cases when the peasants of the border regions tried to exchange Soviet money for gold, and as a result, in certain regions, for example, in the Umansky and Tulchinsky districts of Ukraine, the gold ten rate on the black exchange rose to 17 rubles. 50 kopecks In the Ulanovsky district of the Berdichevsky district, gold five‐ruble notes were sold at 11‐12 rubles. In with. Friedrichivka Proskurovsky district peasants, selling bread to the cooperative, demanded retribution in gold. In the Yurenevsky district of the same district, the supply of products to the market, especially livestock, decreased, as the peasants demanded retribution in gold. There were cases when peasants from distant villages specially came to the region to exchange chervonets for gold, paying 18 rubles each. for the top ten. Similar facts took place in the Shepetivka district in Ukraine and the Chita district in the DCK. Such sentiments affected the progress of grain procurements, causing a reduction in the supply of grain (especially in Ukraine).

Among other negative phenomena, in connection with the spread of rumors about the war, it should be noted that in Ukraine there were cases of peasants selling horses suitable for mobilization into the army, and purchasing them instead of young animals (Tulchinsky,

Shepetovsky districts). In the Pervomaisky district, there were isolated cases of delay in the payment of agricultural tax, exit from the KNS, and among some co‐employees of the border districts of Ukraine there is a desire to transfer to the internal districts of Ukraine (Korostensky district, etc.).

 EASTERN          NATIONAL      REPUBLICS       AND     AUTONOMOUS AREAS

MIDDLE ASIA

Re‐election campaign.

Kyrgyzstan. The grouping struggle, by and large softened in comparison with the past re‐elections, was widespread in a number of regions. The Bayskomanapskie groupings, which began intensive preparations for the re‐elections since the summer of 1926, in places achieved their goals, despite the measures taken to isolate them. Particularly strong development of the groupings took place in the Karakol district, where the leaders of the two hostile groups were manaps and former responsible co‐workers. Strong groups, drawing in the masses of the population and the aul cells of the CPSU (b), operated in the Alamedin and Kalinin volosts. Frunzensky district and in Kenkol‐Karagir and Kir‐Ugul vol. Jalal‐Abad District.

Along with the activities of the groupings, there was an increase in the activity of broad dekhkan masses, who in most cases resolutely rebuffed the bays and manaps. Attendance at election meetings in the Karakol district increased by 12‐15% compared to last year (from 25% 37%).

Turkmenistan. There is a widely developed struggle of tribal groupings led by bai and seeking the capture of aulsovets and VIKs. In the Leninsky district, the religious leadership is especially active, sending its proteges to some Soviets.

Attendance at pre‐election meetings in most auls of the Poltoratsk and Merv districts is low, and the reasons for the absence of voters in many cases were severe cold and untimely notification. However, despite the low percentage of attendance (in some places ‐ 15‐20% of all voters), there was a lively meeting and the activity of dehkans‐participants, especially on issues of land reform (V, 1‐14).

National relations.  In Uzbekistan, there are two cases of clashes between Russian workers and Uzbeks (the cities of Kokand and Samarkand). Antagonism between Russian peasants and

Uzbeks Oktyabrsky (Tashkent district) is aggravated by the agitation of the Russian kulaks and the wrong actions of the local police (mostly Uzbeks). There was a case of an attack by Kyrgyz, who arrived from Kyrgyzstan, on the Uzbek village of Batrak‐Abad, Izbaskent district, Andijan district.

In Kyrgyzstan, relations between Russians and Kyrgyz are still strained. Russian peasants in the Karakol region express strong dissatisfaction with the uneven distribution of land between the Russian and Kyrgyz populations. Discontent is especially developed among the poor.

In Tajikistan, cases of national antagonism on the basis of land and water use were noted between ¹²⁸ Lokays and Tajiks (Kulyab vilayet) and Uzbeks and Tajiks (Kulyab and Gissar vilayets) (V, 15‐22).

Striving for separation from Kyrgyzstan.  In a number of Uzbek districts of Kyrgyzstan, there is a tendency of the Uzbek population to be separated from Kyrgyzstan. The initiators of the movement, mostly grassroots and responsible workers from the Khujand district of Uzbekistan, promise the Uzbeks various benefits, drawing up sentences of the population about their desire to join Uzbekistan. Representatives of the religious community also take part in the campaign.

Similar aspirations of Uzbeks for separation from Kyrgyzstan are noted in the mountains. Osh (V, 23‐25).

KAZAKHSTAN

Re‐election of the Soviets.  Pre‐election groups (baysky and clan) in the Kyrgyz aul have been widely developed. A significant number of groupings are led by bays, atkaminers (former tsarist officials) and Soviet workers of aul, volost and uyezd scale. The methods of struggle of groups for mastering the masses are: mass meals for the poor, bribery of members of election commissions and distribution of special agitators to auls. Particular attention of the grouping is focused on the capture of the Koschi alliance apparatus and the recruitment of alliance members into the number of their supporters.

Party organizations and the Komsomol (aul cells) often dissolve in the struggle of groups, adjoining one or another of them. Cases have been noted when one and the same cell splits into two warring parts adjoining different Bai or clan groupings. In some cases, the secretaries of the Komsomol cells openly admit the inexpediency and hopelessness of an independent struggle, calling on the cells to block with this or that grouping.

The work of election commissions in many cases is influenced by tribal and group interests. The electoral commissions littered with buyouts, their supporters and active groupers often distorted the instructions, depriving the poor and middle peasants of elections, and sometimes even party members from a hostile group, and granting elections to their supporters ‐ buyers and other persons subject to deprivation.

ʺLishenesʺ in the Kyrgyz aul, mainly bai and former foremen, in a number of cases terrorize the election commissions, sometimes seeking to restore their rights. In the Russian countryside and in the Cossack villages, there have been cases of meetings organized by the ʺdisenfranchisedʺ, where questions of the fight against party cells were discussed. In Semipalatinsk province. ʺDisenfranchisedʺ killed a member of the CPSU (b) since 1917, a volost activist. In addition, there have been a number of cases of death threats and beatings from the ʺdisenfranchisedʺ, in most of the kulaks and former white officers (V, 26‐42).

The mood of the Russian Cossacks.  With the approach of spring and field work, discontent among the Russian Cossacks is intensified by the unsettledness of land use issues and disputes on this basis. At the same time, the activity of the ideologists of the autonomist movement (Dzhetysu province) is revived. In order to popularize the idea of restoring the estate Cossacks, special gatherings are convened with the presentation of reports by the leaders of the movement.

The realization of the same goal is achieved by individual leaders of the movement with various kinds of zoning measures (Ural Gubernia), trying to introduce into the Cossack masses the idea of ʺa change in the policy of the Soviet government, convinced of the need to restore the Cossacksʺ (V, 43‐48).

Antagonism between Russian peasants and Kyrgyz.  Everyday hostile relations between Kyrgyz and Russians on the basis of land use, cattle theft, waste of fields and meadows and the national composition of the Soviet apparatus, etc., in some cases, lead to a refusal to jointly participate in the same consumer societies and credit partnerships. At the same time, the urge of the Russian population to be separated into independent administrative units is increasing (V, 49‐55).

Banditry.  A sharp drop in the activity of banditry was noted. All the gang performances that have taken place belong to the category of small‐criminal. The reduction in the number of gangs and bandits was expressed in the following figures: in January of this year there were 16 gangs, 281 bandits, in February ‐ 10 gangs, and 128 bandits.

NORTH CAUCASUS

Pre‐election campaign. As the re‐elections of the Soviets approached, the preparatory work for them intensified on the part of individual layers of the aul and village. The kulaks are especially active, acting in a very organized way in a bloc with other anti‐Soviet elements, mainly with Muslim spirituality, and using all sorts of means. Cases have been noted when kulaks, with the aim of seizing power and attracting the middle peasants to their side, include in their lists the candidatures of the middle peasants, as well as those poor peasants and party members through whom it will be possible to exercise their influence in the Soviets (Ossetia ‐ Pravoberezhny and Alagir‐Ardonsky okrugs). At the same time, the kulaks are conducting widespread agitation for the Soviets without communists, Komsomol members and poor people, as ʺhaving no economic experienceʺ, materially poor and, as a result, ʺfaithful embezzlersʺ (Adyghe‐Circassian, Ossetian and Chechen regions). The success of the struggle of the kulaks in some places is explained by the insufficiently well‐conducted preparatory work on the part of the local cells of the VKP (b) and the Komsomol, and sometimes by the complete absence of organizational work. In this regard, there was a passivity on the part of participants in pre‐election meetings or poor attendance at reporting meetings (Ossetia, Chechnya, AdygeyaCherkesskaya obl.).

In almost all national regions, the groups fighting for primacy in power, first of all, fought for their representatives in the election commissions. In Chechnya, as a result of the electoral system of electoral commissions (they elected an aul gathering), a number of electoral commissions reduced the lists of those deprived of electoral rights, and in some places completely destroyed them (Nadterechny district). In addition to numerous cases of contamination of election commissions, a significant number of them, including district ones, consist of direct contenders for power in a district or region. The latter, on the one hand, included in the lists of ʺdisenfranchisedʺ, dangerous competitors and personal enemies for them on the grounds of ʺunreliabilityʺ, imaginary depravity in the past, etc., Ingushetia, Kabarda) (V, 56‐74).

Grouping and tribal struggle. The grouping and tribal struggle is especially developed in Chechnya. In almost all districts, several groups were identified with the participation of responsible Soviet workers, fighting with each other for the seizure of the district executive committee and relying in their struggle on separate family names and tribes. In a number of districts, following the example of last year, intensified campaigning is under way for the return to power of Elderkhanov Tashtemir (Novo‐Chechensky, Urus‐Martanovsky and Nadterechny districts), who was previously removed for a group struggle. The pre‐election campaign in Karachai and Adygea is taking place under the sign of a noticeable aggravation of class antagonism. In the villages of the aforementioned areas, the former nobility creates groups, relying mainly on the wealthy and kulaks. In opposition to them, peasant groups are formed, consisting of the poor.

The course of the re‐election of the Soviets. In a number of districts, thanks to the provocation of the ʺdisenfranchisedʺ kulaks and other anti‐Soviet elements, the first re‐election meetings were disrupted due to the absence of voters (Ossetia ‐ Pravoberezhny and Alagir‐Ardonsky districts). In some cases, re‐elections were disrupted by the representatives of the grassroots co‐apparatus themselves, who resorted to shooting in the air and beating up voters (Chechnya ‐ Galanchozhsky district). At the re‐elections, kulak groups actively opposed the candidacies of party members, Komsomol members and the poor. Grouping around themselves a significant part of the middle peasants, the kulaks often sought to disrupt the lists of candidates of the village activists and sent their proteges to the village councils (Ossetia, Chechnya ‐ Sharoevsky and Cheberloevsky districts). At the same time, fights with beatings and wounds took place between individual clans during re‐elections (Chechnya ‐ Gudermes district) (V, 83‐90).

National antagonism.  The main reasons for the national enmity, which is observed mainly between the Russians and the highlanders, are still the issues of land management, the national composition of the Soviet apparatus and the provision of one nationality with large benefits and advantages (in terms of tax, etc.) over others. AT

In Karachai, on the basis of national antagonism between a group of Karachais and Cossacks (up to 250 people on both sides), a fight took place in the bazaar, accompanied by mutual beating; Russians, dissatisfied with the biased attitude towards them on the part of the Karachai workers, raise the question of separating them from the region. In order to take away land from nonresident (Tatars, Armenians), the indigenous population (Circassians) elected delegates to be sent to Moscow with a corresponding petition (Adygea‐Circassian region). Antagonism between the Russians and the highlanders also manifested itself in the re‐election campaign of the Soviets in the form of a protest of the Circassians against the appointment of Russians as members of election commissions (ibid.) (V, 91‐98).

ORDINARY Re‐election of the Soviets

The fight for the co‐apparatus.  The increased activity of all strata of the population was accompanied by an almost widespread struggle between the kulaks, blocking with former members of anti‐Soviet parties, the clergy and former landowners, on the one hand, and the poor‐middle peasant bloc, on the other. In some places, organized kulaks under the leadership of former Mensheviks

(Georgia), ¹²⁹ Dashnaks (Armenia) or ¹³⁰ Musavatists (Azerbaijan), taking advantage of the lack of party leadership, led their supporters to new village councils. As a result of the intensified activity of one of such groups under the leadership of a former Musavatist, there was a clash between the kulaks and the poor, with the murder of one participant and several wounds (Azerbaijan ‐ Lankaran district) (V, 99‐107).

Leadership of re‐elections by party organizations and the Komsomol.  Along with the predominance of joint and organized actions of the poor and middle peasants under the leadership of the cells of the VKP (b) and the Komsomol, there have been isolated cases of artificial isolation of the middle peasants from the poor (convocation of exclusively poor peasantsʹ meetings). In places, the poor and middle peasants expressed dissatisfaction with the presence of lists prepared in advance by the communist factions. This discontent was exploited by former Mensheviks and Dashnaks, who emphasized the absence of ʺdemocracyʺ (Georgia, Armenia) (V, 108‐116).

Election Commission.  The clogging of a number of election commissions by kulaks, former Mensheviks, Dashnaks, police officers and foremen in some cases was the result of a hasty, ill‐considered selection of commission members (Georgia, Azerbaijan). In the course of the work of the election commissions, a lot of shortcomings and deliberate distortions of instructions came to light, mainly boiling down to granting election rights to clearly anti‐Soviet elements, along with depriving such poor people, party members and others based on unverified materials or but personal hostility of members of the election commission. There was a case of deprivation of the electoral rights of a stutterer ʺfor inability to speak outʺ (Azerbaijan). Some members of the election commission openly spoke out in defense of clearly anti‐Soviet elements, demanding that they be granted electoral rights. Deputy Chairman of the Mangliya Temizabirkomissii (Georgia) said that in those ¹³¹ there is not a single worker, while there were 300 registered farm laborers (V, 117‐132).

Littering of new village councils.  Preliminary data indicate a number of cases of penetration of former nobles, Mensheviks, foremen, kulaks and other anti‐Soviet elements into village councils. In Azerbaijan, there was a case of electing a participant in the 1920 counterrevolutionary uprising; despite the appeal of the elections by the poor, the higher organizations approved the elections (Cuban u.) (V, 133‐140).

Banditry.  Along with the usual manifestation of small‐scale banditry, in some regions of Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan, there is an increase in Persian bandit groups crossing the border and robbing the population of Karyaginsky district. (Azerbaijan). A number of gangs, previously legalized and left at large, resumed their actions, intensively engaging in robberies (Armenia, Azerbaijan).

Internal national republics

Re‐election of the Soviets.  Crimea, Bashkiria, Tataria, Chuvashia.  A number of errors in the work of election commissions, which basically boiled down to a too formal interpretation of the instructions on depriving of election rights, led to an exorbitant increase in the number of ʺdisenfranchisedʺ, in some places at the expense of persons who did not fit this category. The particularly harsh application of the instruction in Crimea led in a number of cases to massive discontent among all strata of the peasantry, which affected the attendance of preelection and re‐election meetings. Along with this, there was a slowness in the work of a number of election commissions, untimely notification of voters and the provision of electoral rights to dependents of the “disenfranchised”.

During the pre‐election campaign and at the re‐elections themselves, the kulaks, sometimes grouping with the Muslim clergy, were very active. In the struggle to seize the village councils, the kulaks used various means ‐ from preliminary agitation among the population to threats against members of election commissions and party members.

In their speeches, the kulaks and the well‐to‐do demanded the restoration of the rights of representatives of the Muslim faith, their exemption from tax, and the permission of free doctrine (Bashkiria, Tatarstan).

According to preliminary data, there is a partial contamination of village councils by kulaks, mullahs and other anti‐Soviet elements (Bashkiria, Tatarstan) (V, 141‐164).

National antagonism.  Crimea, Tataria, Chuvashia.  Interethnic tensions are mainly caused by unsettled land use issues. Manifestations of national antagonism are also observed on the basis of the uneven distribution of tax duties between Tatars and Russians (Tataria) and on the issue of cooperation (Crimea). Cases of incitement of national antagonism by Soviet workers (Tatarstan) and participation in interethnic              tensions                of            Komsomol          members (Crimea)              were noted. There is a tendency of the Tatars to be separated from Chuvashia and the discontent of the Russian population on the basis of the predominance of the Chuvash in the grassroots co‐apparatus (V, 165173).

Buryat‐Mongolia, Oirotia, Khakass District, Kalmyk Region

Re‐election of councils.  Buryat‐Mongolia.  The election campaign, which was generally satisfactory, was carried out in places with significant defects or was completely absent (Alar aimak). In some cases, pre‐election meetings were disrupted due to weak publicity. Electoral commissions, partially littered with anti‐Soviet elements (former Kolchak members and former bandits), granted voting rights to a number of former bandits, kulaks and merchants.

Attendance at pre‐election and re‐election meetings ranges from 21 to 28% of the total number of voters. The lists of candidates put forward by the cells of the All‐Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) were almost universally accepted by meetings. In a number of cases, the population rejected persons who were included in the lists of cells of the CPSU (b) and known to the population for their defamatory actions.

On the part of the middle peasantry (mainly Russian), the facts of speeches at meetings with the kulaks and against the lists of party members (Aginsky and Khorinsky aimags) were noted. In the Alar aimag, the middle peasants beat up the poor peasant who was nominated as a candidate for the village council.

The well‐to‐do in the course of the re‐election campaign in isolated cases disrupted the poor peasantsʹ meetings (Alar aimag), nominated their candidates to the village council and called on the population to unite (Khorinsky aimak). Some of the ʺdisenfranchisedʺ are conducting anti‐Soviet agitation and spreading provocative rumors.

Oirotia.  Separate electoral commissions deprive the middle peasants of the right to vote, granting electoral rights to former bandits and clerks. In some places, at pre‐election meetings, the poor refuse to work in the village council, considering this to be enslavement (Uspensky aimak). According to preliminary data, some of the newly elected village councils are littered with wealthy and former bandits.

Khakass district.  In the constituency, 7% are deprived of election rights (1469 people against 252 last year). Some of the poor have a negative attitude to the work of the village councils, considering it ʺdestruction for their own economy.ʺ In some places, the kulaks, with the support of the middle peasants, promoted their candidates to the Soviets.

Kalmyk region in a number of cases, re‐emigrants, former white officers, kulaks, and persons who had compromised themselves with various kinds of abuses entered the ulus, aimak and volost election commissions. Some electoral commissions did not include re‐emigrants and former white bandits in the lists of ʺdisenfranchisedʺ and reinstated former traders of Zaisangs in their rights ¹³². Wealthy cattle breeders, in order to restore themselves to the electoral rights, artificially split the farms (Erketeneevsky ulus) (V, 174‐195).

National antagonism.  

Buryat‐Mongolia.  In a number of aimags, antagonism between Russians and Buryats is still observed, in particular, in the campaign for reelection of Soviets and boards of cooperatives. At pre‐election and reelection meetings, Russian peasants in speeches complained about their oppression by the Buryats in matters of land use, education, health care, etc. As before, a strong aggravation of national antagonism is caused by the Buryatization of the Soviet apparatus and the associated unemployment of Russian employees.

Oirotia.  In places where the Russian and Altai population owns a common land, the facts of the Altaiansʹ striving for separation have been noted. In most cases, this desire arises from the agitation of wellto‐do and anti‐Soviet people (Uspensky, Lebedinsky aimags).

Khakass district.  National antagonism between the Russians and the Khakass is manifested during the re‐election of the Soviets. In some places, the Khakass strive (which in some cases they manage) to prevent Russians from entering the Soviets (Askyskiy, Tashtypskiy regions) (V, 197‐201).

INTELLIGENTSIA

The 2nd All‐Union Congress of Scientific Workers (Moscow) was held in an atmosphere of considerable dissatisfaction with the policy of the Peopleʹs Commissariat of Education and was marked by a number of sharp statements against Comrades Lunacharsky and Khodorovsky by prominent scientists on salaries, frequent changes in curricula, and the Peopleʹs Commissarʹs ignorance of the living conditions of scientific workers and universities themselves, etc. The speeches spoke about “promises that are never fulfilled”, “people from the moon” (leading comrades in the Peopleʹs Commissariat for Education), “the imminent death of science,” etc. Academicians Marr and Oldenburgʹs speeches, who spoke out especially sharply, were met with applause.

In Samara, the reactionary part of the professors and teaching staff strives to seize the leadership of the life of the universities. This part of the professorship at the Faculty of Medicine acted especially cohesively on the issue of nominating new researchers, trying to appoint as residents and give the titles of scientific workers to persons from their midst who were certainly ideologically alien to everything Soviet, regardless of even scientific data. On this basis, a fierce struggle ensued between the reactionary professors and student organizations that defended their candidates. In Samara, at the apartment of one of the reactionary professors of the Agricultural Institute, an illegal meeting of the professors was convened, at which, in contrast to the candidates of student organizations and cells, their candidates for the board of the Institute were nominated, which were partially elected during the elections.

The first Siberian scientific research congress was held in Novosibirsk. One of the professors spoke at the congress with a sharp criticism of the economic policy of the Soviet government. In private conversations during breaks, the professors said among themselves: “Soviet power is a rag, a red bastard; communists are people who are destroying their homeland and science. ʺ The congress was in opposition to the Moscow Society for the Study of the Urals, Siberia and the Far East Region, considering itself more competent than society. The anti‐Soviet professors hoped to reveal their political aspirations at the congress and to involve the congress in a discussion about the essence of Soviet power. This was prevented by the appropriate preparation of the regional bureau.

During the re‐election of the Leningrad Soviet, a number of anti‐Soviet manifestations were noted among the teachers and students of Leningrad. In some schools, individual teachers and female teachers waged a vigorous campaign against elections to the Party Council, went from school to school, persuading them not to vote for candidates nominated by the Party organization. At a number of meetings, antiSoviet teachers have shown considerable activity in opposing Communist candidates; there were statements that ʺthe teachers of the USSR were actually deprived of political rightsʺ, etc.

At the Polytechnic Institute on February 3, a leaflet was removed, timed to coincide with the re‐election of the Council, which says about the ʺbankruptcyʺ of the Komsomol, that ʺthe trial of the heroes of Chubarov Lane is a trial of the entire Komsomol,ʺ and so on. The leaflet ends with the words: ʺDown with the obsolete, long live freedom.ʺ

At the volost, uyezd, district and other congresses of educators, which took place in recent months, there was a significant activity of rural teachers, who expressed dissatisfaction with the low level of wages. There were isolated cases of the creation of anti‐Soviet groups of teachers who tried to conduct their candidates, as well as anti‐Soviet protests.

In Belarus in the mountains. At the district teachersʹ conference in Vitebsk, a professor at the Veterinary Institute said: “The party threatens the teachers, the party has no right to lead the teachers”, and so on. The teachers were sympathetic to the performance. In the mountains. In Kharkov, dissatisfaction with the lack of wages on the part of city teachers has significantly increased recently. The teachers demanded the convocation of a citywide conference. The 9% increase for the teachers did not satisfy them and the convened city conference was extremely stormy: representatives of trade organizations were not allowed to speak. The question of wages was not resolved at the conference and was postponed to the Union congress. The majority of the teacherʹs professional activity is adjacent to the rest of the teaching. The teachers are trying to get the support of the working community.

 ANTI‐SOVIET PARTIES AND GROUPS

Anarchists ¹³³. In a number of regions of the Union, the anarchounderground intensified its activities. In Moscow, despite the liquidation of the anarcho‐underground circle among students of the 2nd Moscow State University and a number of active anarchists, underground activity does not stop, new underground circles and groups are being organized; in the districts of the Moscow province. anarchist literature is spreading and individual speeches of anarchists are noted. In other districts (Leningrad, Orel, Bryansk provinces, Kharkov, Odessa, Poltava, Donskoy, Shadrinsky districts, Crimea, DVK), new underground groups are also being organized, young people are being drawn in, and contacts are expanding. In the Shadrinsky District, agitation among young people is intensifying, and anarchist literature is spreading. Every effort is being made to disintegrate the local Komsomol organizations from within, [with] the help of the Komsomol members who have gone over to the anarchists. Komsomol members and less staunch members of the VKP (b) in the Perm district also fall under the influence of the anarchists. In addition, some activity is manifested by the anarch underground in the Nizhny Novgorod province, where individual propaganda is conducted among the workers with the aim of creating a group of antiSoviet elements, as well as in the Yaroslavl province.

The exiled anarchists showed themselves in the Kom [s] region and in the Tomsk district, especially in the latter, where they organized their own library, canteen and mutual aid fund. Campaigning is underway among the local population.

 CLERGY

Tikhonites.  Attitude of the White Clergy ¹³⁴ and the episcopate to Metropolitan Agafangel changed somewhat in a direction more favorable to the latter. Thus, some reactionary bishops turned to the acting locum tenens Seraphim with a proposal to transfer power to Agafangel. Seraphim refused to cede power, but is trying to establish good relations with Agafangel. Recently, Seraphim gave up the idea of forming a synod of secondary (mainly vicar) bishops, allowed the church to remain in its previous position and gave instructions to the localities about “self‐government on the broadest possible basis,” that is, actually makes room for themselves. Significantly increased disagreements between bishops on personal grounds (Tashkent, Irkutsk, Ufa, Omsk, etc.) create dissatisfaction with bishops on the part of Seraphim, as well as white clergy.

A new letter from Peter Polyansky, in which he annuls his resolution on the establishment of the All‐Russian Central Council, the transfer of power to Agafangel, and so on, introduced a great ambiguity into the church situation. The message is being circulated among Moscow churchmen.

Among the laity, especially the former intelligentsia, as well as circles close to monasticism, mystical circles and groups, essentially antiSoviet, such as the ʺFedorovtsyʺ, ʺRozanovtsyʺ, ʺSavelievtsyʺ, ʺNamebozhnikiʺ and ʺChristian Scienceʺ, enjoy considerable success. ʺA circle of Orthodox mystical poetsʺ, ʺDanilovʹs new mystical groupʺ, etc., who recognize the Soviet regime as ʺanti‐Christʺ.

VVTsS.  Some strengthening of this movement is noted in Moscow, where the VVTsS issued a special message against Sergius, in defense of the legality of the VVTsS existence; Bishop Boris Mozhaisky gave a lecture similar to the message. VVTsS is also developing, albeit slowly, in the provinces: in the Ukraine, a number of regions have joined it, in the Ulyanovsk province. Bishop Vissarion joined, leading the work on the preparation of the diocesan congress. The diocesan congress was held in Barnaul.

Renovators.  The Renovationists formed a special commission for the reception of the Tikhonists under the Synod, officially called the ʺcommission of reconciliation,ʺ and issued a special conciliatory message.

They plan to invite all the Ecumenical Patriarchs to the IV local council.

Cultists

Among the sectarianism, groups that do not recognize military service in the Red Army are trying all the time to continue fighting for their line.

Baptists.  The Moscow group of opponents of unconditional military service continues to fight against the presidium of the federal council and demanded permission for any community that expressed a desire to go over to the side of opponents of military service. But this attempt to organize a second all‐Union center was resolutely rebuffed by the presidium, and Muscovites were forced to abandon it.

Evangelists.  The Kalanchevskaya community of      Evangelical

Christians, which does not recognize military service, after joining it by members who came from other communities, starts its work. Each draft meeting ends with anti‐Soviet sermons and prayers for those arrested, for refusing to serve in the Red Army of sectarians; monthly prayers are held for ʺthe liberation of the people and Russia from the atheists.ʺ The Kalanchevites are trying to spread their influence over the village communities.

Tolstoyans. The Tolstoyans are also deploying work against military service. This work is carried out at general meetings in the mountains. Moscow, in addition ‐ by sending to the localities illegal bulletins (magazine) of the Moscow Vegetarian Society and distributing illegal letters on behalf of the circle of ʺfriendly communicationʺ. Along with this, the publication of episodic collections directed against military service was resumed. The supply of foreign pacifist magazines with lists of persons arrested for refusing military service continues: in January, 40 names of those arrested and 3 letters of those imprisoned in the USSR for propaganda against military service were placed in foreign magazines. A collection has been organized across England to assist these individuals;

 BANDITRY

Centre.  Criminal banditry increased somewhat, mainly due to the appearance from the south of the well‐known ʺremnants of suicide bombersʺ operating in Kursk province, and the emergence of small groups (2‐4 people) within the Tver and Ryazan provinces. Of the individual banditry, noteworthy is the robbery of mail in the amount of over 3 ʹ/ 2 thousand rubles, accompanied by the injury of the postman (Ryazan province). In total, there are 11 landscapes in the district with a total number of 59 people, last month 14 gangs ‐ 67 people.

West (hinterland).  The gangs showed activity: Shantera (Rechitsa district), not [unknown] to [command] among 6 people in the Slutsk district, Nevmerzhitsky‐Kabylinsky (Mozyr district) and unknown] to [command] among 10 people in Bobruisk district. In the rest of the districts, small criminal groups operated, which carried out a number of robberies, of which murder and robbery in the amount of 7,000 rubles should be noted. factory manager. ʺWasteland‐Blonnayaʺ. In total, there are 12 landscapes of 52 people in the region, last month 11 gangs ‐ 50 people.

Ukraine.  In recent years, sabotage gangs appear much less frequently on the territory of Ukraine. The last appearance of such a group of bandits from the Ovcharuk gang occurred in the Kopaygorodsky district, where a raid on the Khrenovets economy was carried out ¹³⁵... The bandits, pursued by the strike group, abandoned the horses they had captured in the economy and crossed over to the Romanian side. Two of these bandits were killed and two were detained. Local organized gangs showed some activity: Vaschenko (Glukhovsky district), Blazhevsky (Cherkassky district) and Kravtsova (Melitopol district). The latter carried out several robberies of cooperatives. The results of the work carried out to combat banditry are as follows: 2 active bandits from the Yanevich‐Renkas group and 13 people of accomplices‐harboring were detained, Boyarchenkoʹs gangs (Chernihiv district) and Podvalny (Umansky district) were liquidated. During the liquidation of the latter, 8 active bandits and 26 accomplices were detained and weapons were taken away; the leader of the Basement is killed. During the operation, the head of the Khristinovskaya district militia and one peasant who participated in the operation were killed in a shootout. The gang operated for 6 months and during this time carried out 10 raids on rural cooperatives and up to 15 murders. In addition, the leader of the already liquidated gang, Gulyanitskiy (Nizhyn district), and the leader of Kvasha, who, being captured, committed suicide were detained. In total, there are 17 gangs in the region — 115 people, last month 19 gangs — 140 people.

North Caucasian Territory (Cossack Districts).  The activity of smallgroup unorganized banditry continues to increase. Groups of 2 to 6 people commit daring robberies of citizens, grassroots cooperatives and trade enterprises, in some cases, the raids are accompanied by murders. During the period from January 15 to February 15, the region took into account: armed robberies ‐ 95, thefts ‐ 315, animal theft ‐ 131 heads, murders ‐ 12. In connection with the development of criminality and cattle theft, the entire North Caucasian Territory was declared ʺUnsuccessful in banditryʺ for a period of two months. In total, there are 3 gangs of 17 people in the Cossack districts of the region, last month 2 gangs ‐ 13 people.

Siberia.  Due to the growth of banditry since the second half of 1926, mainly in the districts of Barnaul, Khakassk, Kuznetsk, Rubtsovsk, Barabinsk, by the decree of the Central Executive Committee of the USSR of December 9, 1926, Siberia was declared ʺunsuccessful in terms of banditryʺ until February 1.

From the results of the campaign against banditry carried out in the manner of this decree, it should be noted the complete elimination of 9 gangs with a total number (together with accomplices) of 86 people. Due to the fact that in carrying out this campaign, both the militia and the threat investigator were not up to par, the work to eliminate banditry is being done mainly by the forces of the OGPU. Since the beginning of the campaign, 53 investigative cases have been considered, in which 153 people were shot, 19 people were imprisoned in a concentration camp, 29 people were exiled, 3 were sent to court, 23 were released, there are 88 cases per 400 people under investigation.

In total, there are 8 gangs of over 30 people in the region.

Far Eastern Territory.  There is a lull in criminal banditry and a complete absence of political landscapes that are hiding abroad. In total, there are 7 gangs of 55 people in the foreign region of the DCK, last month 8 gangs ‐ 53 people, in the inner region ‐ 3 gangs ‐ 23 people, last month 6 gangs ‐ 56 people.

Deputy before the OGPU Yagoda

Head of the Information Department Alekseev

Secretary of INFO OGPU Kucherov

APPENDIX No. 1

WORKERS  

Metalworkers

1. Strikes

1.                   Zavod im. Petrovsky (Kherson district). On February 10, the molders (30 people) of the foundry, due to a reduction in prices by 20‐38%, stopped working (prices decreased due to a new distribution of work). The strike of the molders caused a stop of the entire foundry (12 hours off). The moldersʹ strike caused discontent among workers in other workshops. The workers said that ʺthe conflict could be settled through the Union without any bagpipes ¹³⁶ undermining the work of the plant.ʺ

2.                   Plant named after Karl Liebknecht (Dnepropetrovsk district). On February 9, workers of the first shift of the Bride mill and furnace No. 4 did not start work due to a decrease in wages in January. In response to the proposal of the shift commissioner to stand at the machines, the workers said: ʺEnough to lead us by the nose, you have been driving for two years now.ʺ One worker, a party candidate, urged the party members of this shift to ʺkeep up with the workers.ʺ The conflict was eliminated after the price increase. The workers did not work ʹ/ 2 hours.

3.                   Kiev arsenal.  On February 25, 50 workers of the turning shop (930 people) stopped working on the basis of arbitrary assignment of prices by the administration and the transition to a new settlement under a collective agreement (instead of 25 days a month ‐ 24 days). The prices in this workshop for some work, compared to pre‐war ones, have sharply decreased (for example, 100 pieces of hubs ¹³⁷ in 1913 they were valued at 22 rubles, now 6 rubles). The workers who arrived at the shop of the prezavkom and the secretary of the cell demanded that their prices be increased. During negotiations with the prezavkom, the rest of the shop workers (180 people) also stopped working. Summoned to the workshop of the pre‐regional committee of metalworkers, he proposed to establish norms in such a way that the January earnings would not be lower than the December one, but the deputy categorically objected to this. arsenal manager. At the suggestion of the factory committee, a commission of 6 people was elected to resolve the conflict. 50 turners went on strike for 6 hours, the rest of the shop workers, 180 people ‐ 15 minutes. In other shops, the strike did not meet with support.

4.                   Transport workshops to them. Petrovsky (Kherson district). On February 14, 10 workers in the blacksmith shop stopped working to protest a 50% cut in prices. The workers, without leaving the workshop, did not work until lunchtime and began to work at the machines only after the head. workshops promised to make an increase. On February 19, when the workers turned to the head of state, demanding that the promise be fulfilled, he told them: ʺYou cannot raise the prices, whoever does not like can go out the gate.ʺ There is talk among the workers to leave the factory in the spring. On February 17, 12 workers in the finger assembly shop refused to start work on the grounds of lower prices. The decrease in prices is explained by the mechanization of work (a press is installed). The workers point out that the press wonʹt make the job easier. The work began two hours after the promise to consider the issue.

5.                   Shipyard named after Lenin (Leningrad). On February 11, 400 people went on strike due to a decrease in earnings by 30 rubles. and more, meanwhile, as they were promised that the decline will not exceed 5‐7 rubles. The decline affected workers‐time workers (mainly 6th grade and above); for workers of the lower ranks, the decline affected partially (locomotive, steam‐mechanical and repair‐mechanical shops). The decrease in wages was due to the fact that the plant was taken over by Mashinotrest, where the existing prices were lower than in Sudotrest. The strike, in addition to the reduction in wages, also had an insufficient explanation from the bureau of the collective of the AllUnion Communist Party and the factory committee. On February 12, the workers started to work, but their mood remains tense. Individual party members also took part in the strike.

6.                   Plant No. 2 named after Engels (the village of Khortytsya, Zaporozhye district). On February 7, a brigade of molders (12 people) stopped working due to the appointment of prices that reduce wages without the approval of a trade union organization. It was created by the strike, which held an illegal meeting of the striking molders. At the meeting, a number of demands were put forward: the dismissal of the director (ʺas a decomposed elementʺ), the removal of the head. TNB and the foreman of the foundry, payment for the days of the strike. All negotiations with the administration were entrusted to the strike, in which the strikers proposed to appoint a representative from the factory committee. The general meeting of the factory workers, to which the molders appealed, decided to consider the termination of the moldersʹ work as a ʺmisunderstandingʺ. The molders agreed to submit the issue for permission to the regional committee of metalworkers; on February 9, the work was resumed.

Attached is a copy of the minutes of the meeting of the striking molders.

“In view of the current situation at the plant No. 2 named after Engels, according to which one cannot continue to work and endure:

1)                   Despite a repeated request to the factory committee to hold shop meetings to eliminate a number of defects, as well as to carry out a number of professional work, the factory committee, for its part, promised to carry out such, which was scheduled for February 4 this year. d. After the end of the work, all the workers gathered, but, unfortunately, the pre‐order for the meeting did not appear for reasons unknown to us, as a result of which the meeting did not take place. We, the workers, learned illegally that the director of the plant categorically forbade the pre‐Zavkom to hold meetings at the plant. February 5 p. Mr. one of the workers asked the director that ʺwhen the factory committee holds a meeting at our factory,ʺ the director replied in a rude manner that he did not permit any meetings at the factory and did not recognize any factory committees. In this case, it became clear to the workers that the director fights against the factory committee and does not give him the opportunity to work among the workers, and by his actions the director artificially puts the factory committee outside the workers and thereby covers up both his own and othersʹ actions. For example, the director prohibits the pre‐commissioner from talking to workers and even visiting workshops and a plant. All these bureaucratic antics by the factory cannot be broken, and such antics of the director cannot be tolerated further, because they violate Article 167 of the Labor Code, and also have no approach to the workers, and as a political worker and promoted by the vanguard of the working class ‐ the Communist Party together with other (the information indicated below) discredits the party and the working class, and therefore such persons cannot occupy such positions, because they run counter to the working class as a decomposed element; TNB acts following his example,

The director not so long ago nominated a worker for the position of foreman in the foundry, who among the workers is considered a rude brute of the highest brand and at the same time this foreman does not understand anything about the assigned case, the director obviously needs rude people, not people of business.

2)                   We, the workers, have been working at this plant since the day it was opened and have been waiting for the full restoration of the plant all the time, enduring need, cold and hunger. Now everything has come to an end, we must now move on to piecework, since the plant has begun mass production. January 18 p. The plant management announced that the molders would start piecework work in advance, pending approval of the piecework rates; the director added that the prices will be approved in 4 days. The molders started to work, as a result they saw the opposite. January 17 p. The prices offered by the factory to the regional committee of the Union of Metalworkers were temporarily approved by the latter for a period unknown to us, the factory management posted these rates after the molders had already worked for half a month. During this time, both sides of the workers did not inform them. At these rates, on some jobs you will by no means work out even a daily wage, and in some jobs, with tension you will reach the daily wage. In this, the plant management deceives the worker and wants to prolong the term of work.

Based on the foregoing, we decided:

a)                   The October Revolution was accomplished by the workers and peasants of the USSR in order to build a socialist state, where there should be no exploiters and encroachments on the rights won by the workers and peasants. Because of this, the workers ʹand peasantsʹ government issued a number of legislative acts that protect the rights of workers and peasants, and we vowed to defend these rights and the gains of the revolution on the day of October, and we defend them, and now we defend them too, we will not stop at anything., we will defend these rights in an organized way and will not allow the manifestation of bureaucracy and command in our plant, whatever it may be.

b)                  At the same time, we have fought and will continue to fight to improve our life. We are perfectly aware and aware of the economic situation of the state, there was a time when we worked for nothing and endured everything, not at all murmuring about our fate. Now, at the moment, it is necessary to equalize workers in terms of their qualifications in all enterprises, and not to equalize the same as workers are equated in terms of their qualifications at the plant. Engels. The plant management wants to drive the worker into the grave.

c)                   Due to the non‐observance of the most elementary rules by the director of the plant to our elected body ‐ the factory committee and the prohibition of free factory meetings, which are fundamentally violated by the code of labor laws, and therefore we ask the factory director to file a petition with the higher authorities to remove the director from office in urgently, as a decomposed item.

2)                   And also, about the dismissal of TNB for threats to dismiss workers and, in general, for rough treatment.

3)                   To put in a categorical form before the plant management [the question] about the removal from the position of the foreman in the foundry of Lepikov, as not corresponding to his purpose, as a rude and careerist.

Due to the fact that piece rates have not yet been approved, and the rates presented to us and the development of mandatory standards, according to which it is impossible to earn even a daily rate and such a rate, with all the tension, it is impossible to fulfill, but we cannot continue to work at such rates and norms in the future before the approval of the relevant norms and prices.

2)                   Despite the fact that there was a decision of the STO to increase the wages of lower qualifications, the plant management has not increased it to this day, and the plant management at the present time may well increase the ranks of workers, since the plant is in full swing and throws the product on the market.

3)                   The plant management conducts systematic red tape, for example, the molders filed an application for an increase in the category for 3 months and they still have no answer.

4)                   Foundry and other workshops are not heated, there is no ventilation, we have to suffocate in smoke, dust and gases and be like cattle in the cold.

e)                   Taking into account that we have repeatedly tried to come to a peace agreement with the plant management on all the above points, but we see that our efforts remain unsuccessful and it is not possible to come to an agreement peacefully, and therefore decided from this date to declare a strike and go on strike until until we are satisfied on all points of our requirement.

f)                    Inform the factory committee about the strike and ask him to report to all appropriate authorities, at the same time ask the factory committee to convene a general meeting of factories No. 4 and 2.

g)                  The factory management must pay for all the days of every striking worker during the strike.

2) At the end of the strike, the plant management must not fire a single worker on strike or hire workers instead of the strikers during the strike.

c) [For] negotiations on the settlement of the strike, we, the workers, put forward on our side a strike and ask the factory committee to give its representative to the strike. ʺ

Strike committee signatures.

The signatures of the striking workers.

This protocol is given in spelling and style.

Reduced wages

7.                   Factory ʺKrasny Putilovetsʺ Machinotrest, Leningrad. In a number of shops, sharp conflicts were noted on the basis of incorrect distribution of the increase, carried out at the plant under the new tariff agreement. In the yard shop, the increase was calculated not according to the tariff, but according to the average earnings, which gives them only 1 ruble. increase, instead of 10 rubles. The workers, having summoned the head of the shop for an explanation, said: “Where is the truth, the center has increased the salary, but we were given a pittance. Our labor, blood‐earned pennies, will be remembered by the parasites of business executives. ʺ For many workers of this workshop, earnings even decreased (75‐80 rubles in December, 65‐50 rubles in January). The head of the electrical department ordered that the earnings should not exceed December; this order cancels the increase in the tariff agreement. This measure is supposed to be carried out by cutting the running‐in. In the steam shop (231 people), despite a 20% increase, earnings in January on average decreased by 5‐10 rubles, which is explained by a decrease in premiums by 30%. On this basis, on February 11 and 14, groups of stokers (35 and 72 people) poured, threatening to beat the head of the shop and take out the head in a wheelbarrow. labor protection. Dissatisfaction with the incorrect distribution of the increase was noted in the new forge, in the copper foundry, boiler house, tractor and other workshops.

8.                   Pipe plant them. Kalinin (2780 workers) of the Military Industry, Leningrad. Extra earnings for time workers, mainly in electrical engineering, textile and 10th workshops, decreased by 30% due to the new calculation of their earnings from the average earnings of a piece worker. In this connection, the workers say: “Weʹll have to put the TNB appraiser in a bag, smear it with red lead and take it in a wheelbarrow to the river. Smolenka ʺ.

9.                   Workshops of precision instruments. Evdokimov (workers 167 people), Leningrad. In one of the paragraphs (22nd) of the new collective agreement, a note was made that a reduction in prices by the administration is unacceptable. Despite this, by order of the chairman of the optical‐mechanical production trust, a reduction in prices is being carried out (for example, for a part, before the conclusion of the contract, they paid 1 ruble, now ‐ 60 kopecks) The representative of the Union told the workers that measures were taken to prevent such a violation of the contract. The general meeting of the workers decided to propose to the Union that the 22nd paragraph be implemented immediately.

10.                Plant ʺKrasny Profintern” (Zinovievsky district, Ukraine). The plant is reducing 200 workers and it is planned to switch to a shorter working week ‐ by 3 days). The workers do not object to the last measure, the reduction is caused due to the lack of raw materials and orders.

11.                Gorlovsky mechanical plant (Artyomovsky district). 120 workers are laid off. Strong discontent is noted among the downsized demobilized Red Army soldiers. Among them, conversations are noted: ʺWe did not fulfill the directives of the Soviet government, we will go to Kharkov with a complaint.ʺ

12.                Factory ʺKrasnaya Zvezda” (Zinovievsky District). Due to the reduction in production, part of the skilled workers were transferred to yard work. In this regard, their earnings decreased from 200 to 40 rubles. per month. The transfer concerned mainly unsecured workers.

13.                Izhevsk factories of the Military Industry (Votsk region). Due to the lack of orders for peaceful products, it is planned to reduce 813 people. The plant management and the plant committee decided, first of all, to dismiss the old people, workers with poor health and who had worked at the plant under Soviet rule for at least 8 years. Those scheduled for reduction are examined by a medical commission to determine the state of health. Among those downsized, there is serious discontent, there is talk: “For honestly serving the Soviet regime, they are fired, and whoever ran with Kolchak, he doesn’t work for 8 years, so they leave. They are fired from the factory, they are given a penny pension, as long as you live on it, children are not accepted at the factory either; used to be from the age of 15 you take to the factory, and now no one will accept a 19‐year‐old because, as if adults are superfluous. ʺ

Delay in salary

14.                Yugokamsk agricultural plant (Ural). Due to the delay in wages, the workers of the machine shop issued leaflets calling for the rest of the workers to speak:

“Comrades foundry workers, we urge you in what we all suffer from. After all, you, comrades, you yourself know how we are given a salary and how long will we endure this shop. Our children are starving. Some are without firewood. The plant management doesnʹt care about us. Apparently, he forgot too. The further, the worse it gets. Isnʹt it time for us, comrades, to put an end to this and on you we hope that you will not leave us on the day when we inform you?

With comradely greetings, the workers of the mech shop. ʺ

15.                Plant them. Kolyuschenko (903 workers). There is strong discontent among workers over wage arrears. The workers say: “We are already earning bread and water, and here wages are still delayed. It happens that because of the delay in wages our workers go to work and ask for alms under their windows. ʺ

16.                Ust‐Katavskiy Carriage Works (Yuzhuraltrest, 1300 workers). Among the workers, there is a sharp dissatisfaction with the delay in wages (for the first half of December, the salary was issued on January 14, 1927, for the second half of December ‐ on January 17, and then only at a rate of 60%). On this basis, on the initiative of the workers of the blacksmith shop, a meeting was called. Some of the workers who spoke said: ʺThey give out wages in small particles, they poison us like dogs, and the party pays no attention to this, but only consoles us with various promises.ʺ

II. Textile workers 1. Strikes

17.                Glukhovsky factory named after Lenin of the 3rd Cotton Trust (Moscow). On February 1, the warehouse workers of the white and black warehouse (100 people) stopped working in connection with the announcement on February 10 at the OKF conference about the reduction of wages under the new collective agreement. Some warehouses attending the conference offered to dismiss workers from other departments and go out into the street. The proposal was not supported. After the explanation of the workers, members of the CPSU (b), the warehouse workers began to work. The strike lasted one hour.

On February 9, the weavers of the first shift, having learned from their paybooks about the decrease in wages for January, stopped work and went to the head. weaving department. The workers began to work on the machines after promising to increase their wages.

The second shift of weavers (20 people), which came at 5 oʹclock, also stopped work, resuming it after an explanation from the head. department; each shift did not work for 1 hour. The decrease in wages for weavers working on three looms was caused by the work of the ʺmarshmallowʺ. In January, weavers earned 40‐60 rubles, whereas before, working for two, they earned 52‐55 rubles. per month.

18.                1st Republican Factory of Flax Management (Kostroma Gubernia). On February 3, 15 warders of the weaving‐preparatory department, in connection with a decrease in wages by 30‐35% (which is caused by the poor quality of raw materials) for the 2nd half of January, stopped working, demanding an increase in prices. The conflict pricing commission could not resolve the issue of revising the rates, the case was referred to the court, which ordered an additional payment on average earnings.

In the weaving and sailcloth department, 100 people stopped working due to the fact that the administration, without announcing the prices for the new sailcloth, calculated the January salary at piece rates at the rate of 8 rubles. for 100 worked meters of canvas. The members of the factory committee persuaded the workers to start work, proposing to allocate three representatives. The Fabkom called an emergency meeting, at which the administration stubbornly refused to pay workers the average wage (according to the collective agreement, before the norms and prices for a particular product are announced, workers are paid their average daily wages). The members of the factory committee argued the validity of the workersʹ demands, saying that even the RKK did not know about the prices for the new sailcloth, although it had to approve them. As a result of the meeting, an agreement was reached to pay the average salary. Besides, the administration said the February pricing would be revised. The strike lasted 20 minutes.

19.                Paper‐spinning factory ʺRed Perekop” (Yaroslavl province). On February 11, the 2nd shift (some of them party members) of the weaving department (200 people) stopped work due to the fact that in January there was a shortfall of several rubles. The workers demanded to clarify the director and head. new factory. Despite the fact that they were informed that the workers were demanding them, they did not show up and came only after one weaver called them on the phone, saying that ʺthey should stop deceiving the workers.ʺ The director promised to hold a meeting to resolve the issue, after which the workers began to work. Not working 1 1/ 2 hours. The meeting, however, did not take place, as the theater premises intended for the meeting were provided for the performance. This caused strong indignation among the workers: ʺThe theater was occupied for the performance, but they do not want to arrange meetings for us, they do not want to explain why the flaw is obtained, they do not peer into our needs, but only try to aggravate the conflict.ʺ At the meeting, held only on February 14, they decided to raise the issue of a new collective agreement and elect delegates for a trip to Moscow. The issue was agreed with the administration, the district delegates of the CPSU (b) and the FZK. The workers who spoke out accused the factory of inaction. Head a new factory, who made an explanation, said that it was not when the collective agreement was renewed and the recount was made by order of the director. Some workers indicated that 1800 rubles remained from the leveling fund. which the administration refuses to distribute among the workers. Individual members of the CPSU (b), who spoke in defense of the collective agreement, were not allowed to speak. At the end of the meeting, several people were elected for a trip to Moscow, and a resolution was passed to request assistance from the delegation from the department of the Union and the factory committee. On February 16, there were tendencies among the workers to send delegates to Moscow only from workers. The first shift in the weaving shop of the new factory insisted before the trade union representative not to send any of the representatives of the factory and the governorʹs department, since they would substitute a foot for them in Moscow. One of the workersʹ delegates said: “By all means, we will achieve our goal; if something happens, then we will demand a commission from the center to examine our trust and how the leveling went, since the board itself is confused: pom. director once said that there were 1800 rubles left. leveling money, another time he said that there were 900 rubles left, and the representative of the gubernia union said 400 rubles, which means they did not agree on how to deceive the workers. On February 17, conversations were noted in the weaving shop: “If they send representatives from the gubernia union together with the workersʹ delegation and meet them in Moscow, they will demand their removal; if they come from Moscow without results, they will go on strike. ʺ On the same day, the delegates gathered in the premises of the factory committee rejected an offer to travel together with a representative of the Union. And when on February 18 the director brought two horses for the delegates, one had to be sent back.

Unrest among the weavers began in December of this year (250 workers went on strike on December 22) in connection with a small increase in the collective agreement. Salary increase affected nizkorazryadnikov preferably 18% to 8‐th digit and 3% to 8 1/ 2 discharge to pieceworkers, processing more than 20%. The collective agreement was approved at the factory district conference, but due to a poor explanation of trade union organizations, a weaver 4 and April 1/ 2 bits to create views that they get a 10% gain, along with the hourly workers of this category, while the collective agreement increase them is as pieceworkers with a large extra income, only 3%.

20.                Spinning and thread factory them. Khalturin (6,180 workers) Jleningradtextile. By order of the trust, the ranks of about 500 workers were lowered since the prices for some jobs were 1 ʹ/ 2 % higher than in other factories for the same jobs. The decrease mainly affected the spinning department. Before the reduction, female workers of the 6th category received 58 rubles, after the reduction ‐ 55 rubles. 10 kopecks, 4th grade ‐ 52 rubles. 50 kopecks on this basis, on February 8, employees of the card department ¹³⁸ (50 people) stopped work and went to the office to find out the reasons. The workers said to the director: ʺYou are starting to squeeze us worse than under the old regime.ʺ The work began after promising to ask the trust to leave the previous ranks. Fermentation was also noted in other departments.

On February 9, the morning shift of the card department, numbering 150 people, having learned that the workers had gone to the office the day before for a raise, also stopped work and went to the head. production to find out the reasons for the reduction in wages. Didnʹt work for 3 hours. The director and the representative of the factory committee promised an increase of 3%, but after working for half an hour, they stopped the cars again.

On February 10, a group of women workers (31 people) went to the factory. Nogin in order to find out the working conditions and the amount of earnings received at this factory. The female workers found that the workers receive half a grade higher, the percentage of extra earnings is higher than at the Khalturin factory (for the second half of January at the Nogin factory, earnings were 4‐6 rubles more). In addition, working conditions turned out to be better (special workers brought pipes at the Nogin factory). The administration and the factory, after a long break, convinced the workers that at the factory. Noginaʹs work is much more difficult. But the workers nevertheless decided to wait for the next payday and, if the wages were insufficient, to raise the issue of raising wages again.

21.                F‐ka ʺProletarskaya m‐raʺ of the Tver Cotton Trust (Tver Gubernia). In connection with the deterioration in the quality of the warp and weft, the weavers put forward a demand to the factory to revise the wages, threatening to strike. The issue was referred to arbitration. On February 18, during a meeting of the arbitration commission, workers of the warping shop (87 people) appeared at the factory and demanded explanations about the reasons for the decrease in their earnings; the factory replied that the issue is being resolved in the arbitration commission.

At 11 oʹclock in the factory came with the same statement the reel of the first shift. When set to work katushechnitsy second shift, they came two workers sizing ¹³⁹ card and have turned to him with a proposal to ʺnot shoot the breeze, to do the same, as did warper ‐ finish up work and be done with it.ʺ

The bobbins stopped the machines and went to the factory, where they got the same answer as the rest of the disgruntled workers. Returning to the factory, the reel‐to‐reel and warp‐makers asked the timekeeper: ʺWhy did we get the difference in salary, we cannot understand how they count.ʺ To this the timekeeper replied: “I cannot explain to you, because I do not want to go to prison; how the salary is calculated is a secret and I do not intend to tell you about it. ʺ Having received such an answer, the workers became even more agitated, shouts were heard: ʺThey hide from us how the salary is calculated, everything is in secret, they always deceive the workers, there is only one lie around, thatʹs why we will not understand the calculation.ʺ The workers demanded from the representative of the factory committee the immediate removal of the timekeeper from work and announcement of the decision of the arbitration commission no later than 5 pm, otherwise they will go on strike. The reduction in wages for warders, bobbins and fillers is on average 3‐5%. The arbitration commission decided to pay all workers, whose wages have decreased, according to the average earnings for the October‐November months. Deputy the director said that the directorateʹs arbitration ruling would be appealed. The trust offered the factory management to issue the difference in accordance with the decision of the arbitration commission. The bobbin and sizing machines did not work for half an hour. The trust offered the factory management to issue the difference in accordance with the decision of the arbitration commission. The bobbin and sizing machines did not work for half an hour.

2. Movement among the weaving apprentices

22.                Ivanovo‐Voznesenskaya province. Within three days (February 3‐5), a strike was declared by 328 apprentices (out of 380 apprentices) working in factories: Zaryadye, Staro‐Dmitrovskaya, Bolshaya Dmitrovskaya mry, NIVM, BIVM and Rabkrai. The reason for the strike was a decrease in the percentage of apprentices ʹearnings to workersʹ earnings, which, however, was more than offset by an increase in workers ʹwages and, as a result, gave some increase in apprenticesʹ earnings. The performance of the apprentices was distinguished by organization, some of the apprentices participated in conflicts, since the changes in the collective agreement were not clear to her and she believed that the new calculations would entail a decrease in wages. The last group is characterized by the statement of one of the apprentices of the Zaryadye factory: “The office did not explain well to us about the increase, they only told us that they had reduced 1%, so the booze was up.” Individual party members took part in the strikes. At the Zaryadye factory, two party members were among the initiators of the strike. As part of the delegation¹⁴⁰, chosen by the strikers for negotiations with GOST ¹⁴¹, out of 5 people were 3 party members. Due to the fact that the demands of the apprentices were not supported by the bulk of the workers and a number of workersʹ meetings condemned their speeches, the apprentices refused to further speak (sending a delegation to the center) and began work on the terms of a new agreement. Up to 30 initiators were dismissed (including some members of the CPSU).

The movements of apprentices in connection with dissatisfaction with the terms of the new collective agreement were also noted at enterprises located in the districts of Ivanovo‐Voznesensk province. (factory ʺAvangardʺ Vladtekstiltrest, factories ʺKrasny Profinternʺ, named after Nogin, Romnenskaya, ʺKrasny Oktyabrʺ, named after Demyan Poor Gostrest), but they have not yet taken on a strike character; in most factories, the issue is referred to union authorities. The mood continues to be tense.

23.                F‐ka them. Vagzhanova (Tver province) One of the shifts of apprentices (47 people) stopped working. The apprentices made demands to cancel the percentage of their wages to the wages of weavers (10.4%) established by the new collective agreement, leaving the previous ratio (11%), and to reduce the number of machines in a set from 54 to 48. The decrease in the wages of apprentices in this factory is insignificant. The director suggested that the shift begin work, promising to settle the issue. Didnʹt work for 30 minutes.

24.                F‐ka them. Markov (1,556 workers) Vigon‐trust, Moscow. On February 7, two shifts (32 people) of weaving apprentices went on strike (the first at 2 ʹ/ 2 o’clock, the second at 3 oʹclock) due to a decrease in their earnings in January from 10 to 20 rubles. The decrease in wages is explained by the fact that they received additional earnings depending on the output of the weavers, who had not worked out their basic norm due to the poor quality of the raw materials. The apprentices demanded to guarantee them a minimum earnings of 120 rubles. a month, which the administration refused them. At the meeting of weavers arranged by the director, the proposal of the representative of the Union to create a commission with the participation of apprentices was accepted and the issue was resolved within three days, after which the apprentices began to work. Didnʹt work 2 ʹ/ 2 hours.

25.                F‐ka ʺProletarian M‐ryʺ.  The deterioration in the quality of the warp and weft caused a decrease in the wages of weavers, which led to a decrease in the wages of apprentices by 13‐19 rubles. On February 11, apprentices (15 people) came to the factory and demanded an explanation of the reasons for the decline in earnings. The factory committee replied that ʺit is possible that the weavers did not work well.ʺ To check the apprenticesʹ application, a representative of the TNB was summoned, who found that the decrease in wages for January was 11% (for December — 10%). Among the apprentices there is talk that ʺit is necessary to arrange a secret meeting and come to an agreement in order to immediately stop the entire factory.ʺ

3. Protracted conflicts

26.  Factory ʺZaryadyeʺ. About 6 months ago, workers of the printing department (200 people) submitted an application to the TNB with a request to allow them to switch to individual piecework. The TNB issue has not yet been resolved, TNB refers to the TO of textiles, which allegedly delays the resolution of the issue. On February 8, a delegation from the workers of the printing department appeared at the factory, threatening with a strike, and demanded that the printers be allowed to switch to individual piecework. The Fabkom promised to raise the issue for consideration by the GOST Presidium and introduce individual piecework from March 1. Krasovar workers (80 people) are also seeking the introduction of piecework, which was temporarily canceled until new piece rates were worked out. The question is sorted out within 4 months without any results. Recently, groups of dye workers have come to the factory every day, demanding the introduction of piecework. There is information that as early as February 7, the factory from the trust received a draft of norms and prices for the printing department and the Krasovary with a proposal to discuss the project at a meeting of workers of this department in the near future. However, the factory keeps these materials under the cloth. The demand of the workers of the print department to convene a meeting on the issue of piecework was also not satisfied by the factory committee. The workers of the printing department and Krasovary intend to wait for the resolution of the issue until March 1 and, if by that time individual piecework has not been introduced, they will go on strike.

At this factory, a group of workers (12 people) of the propellers began to work separately from the workers on dusty troikas ¹⁴². The division of work greatly influenced the percentage of their processing (instead of 25% ‐ 9‐10%). The workers submitted an application to the FZK. The commission created, after checking their work, found that they were being paid a salary based on less time than they were supposed to do to complete the work, and decided to pay the difference. Despite the fact that two months have passed since the decision of the commission, it is not carried out by the administration, the workers are threatening to strike.

On February 25, the workersʹ demand was satisfied. New prices were posted, at which Raklist ¹⁴³ received 5 rubles. 31 kopecks instead of the previous 6 rubles. 70 kopecks. Since the prices were very unclear and the workers could not understand them, the first shift of the printing department, without understanding the prices, left a note to the workers of the second shift: ʺWe do not accept new prices.ʺ

On February 26, the workers of the second shift decided not to accept the new rates: “The rates were for 8 months, and you canʹt understand anything about them”. The workers demanded that an extraordinary meeting be called. The speakers indicated that they had been deceived by ʺindividual piecework.ʺ Despite the clarification of the factory committee and shop delegates about the profitability of the new rates (since when switching to individual piecework, workers are allowed to increase the overtime rate, which will increase wages), the workers did not agree and decided to create a commission and do not switch to individual work until it clarifies the issue.

Logging workers

27.                Kamuraltrest (Tagil district). On February 11, the workers of the logging offices of the Lozvinskaya office and workers working in the area of the Lobanovskaya village council, by order of the general meeting convened without the knowledge of the trade organizers, stopped working. The workers demanded an increase in prices for the first group by 60% and the second ‐ by 40%. A total of 500 people went on strike.

28.                Severoles (North‐Dvinsk province.). In the Nikolsky district, there is a sharp discontent with low wages. The team of lumberjacks submitted the following application to the Zavrazhsky village council: “We cannot earn even 50 kopecks. per day and inform all the surrounding villages about the need to discuss the issue of wages. It is necessary to point out to Severoles that our work is valued very cheaply by them and does not justify our work, since bread is very expensive ‐ a pood costs 1 ruble. 80 kopecks, and it’s impossible to buy essential goods, the employees of Severwood receive a large salary, and we work for their pockets. We, citizens of the Staryginsky collective, in spite of the fact that we have concluded an agreement, are laying down axes and going on strike because there is no way to improve our economy with our earnings. In factories and factories, the working class has achieved what it needs, and we have to go beg for Severolis. The servants of Severwood tell us that they will not add prices to us, since it was established by the province, and we inform all the villages that it is enough for Severolis to mock us. Under the tsar it was much better to work, but under the Soviet regime it was worse. The Staryginsky collective asks the village council to announce a meeting in all villages to discuss the issue of wages. ʺ

Similar applications were submitted by other groups of lumberjacks.

29.                Alush forestry (Kamensk district). Among the logging workers, there is discontent with the low wages (75 kopecks per day) with a 10hour working day. Discontent is compounded by poor housing conditions. The barracks where the workers live are semi‐dark, they are not heated, and it flows from the ceiling. Workers have stomach problems due to poor water.

30.                Logging of Sevkavpromles (Black Sea District). In sl. Ermolovskaya, Pilenkovsky village council of the Sochi region, more than 80 workers work in the logging area. The workers have no barracks, they sleep on straw. The professional representative is inactive. Head development agreed with a private citizen, who has a restaurant in the area of development, to sell workers on credit vodka on receipts, which will be paid by the administration with subsequent deduction from the workersʹ earnings. In this regard, among the workers there is a general drunkenness. The owner of the restaurant, taking advantage of the drunken state of the workers, cheats them.

31.                Vologda province.  Office of the Volgo‐Kaspiles Totemsky u. delays the wages of the peasants of Yurkinsky vol., working on logging. The debt reaches 6,600 rubles. The peasants, having in their hands the writs of execution of the peopleʹs court, since last year have not been able to receive wages, and do not pay the agricultural tax.

32.                Yuzhuralles (Bashkiria). The Canonikolskaya and Irgizlinskaya logging offices (Zilairsky canton), which have been logging since the spring of 1926, have not paid the workersʹ wages yet. The debt reaches 30,000 rubles. Workers and their families begin to feed on surrogates. Every day, the offices are besieged by workers demanding to pay off the debt. The administration gets off with promises.

Renewal of collective agreements

Metalworkers

33.                Plant ʺTrubosoedinenie” (Moscow). With a general decrease in the wage fund for the plant by 10%, a new scale of hard earnings was introduced for auxiliary workers (120 people), according to which the wages of individual workers are reduced by 40%. The support workers intended to go on strike, after which the plant management promised to reconsider the issue of reducing.

34.                1st Tsehoobozny plant Tsupvoza (Moscow). Workers‐pieceworkers (380 people) are lowering their rates from 10 to 25%; on this basis, a leaflet calling for a strike was distributed among the workers. The leaflet contains the following phrases: “Some inert bureaucratic force is gradually descending on us proletarians, whose life is still so gray and unattractive, but we must not be passive, we must indignantly reject these attempts to worsen our economic situation. For only through economic well‐being is the way open for us to work on ourselves, on our class self‐awareness. A bad economy mode if it sucks out the workerʹs juices. ʺ “The policy is bad if it is going to raise our industry by squeezed workersʹ sweat, and the white hands of business executives           are          protected             from      encroachment    on                 their whiteness. Comrades, down with philistinism. Down with slavish admiration for the powers that be. ʺ ʺRemember, comrades, that no one will help us except ourselves.ʺ

35.                Maiumpecm (Leningrad). When considering the draft collective agreement from 62 to 40 paragraphs between the Union and the administration, no agreement was reached. The main discrepancy was on the tariff part, which was almost entirely rejected by the trust. In the final form, the disputed points for the most part were not included in the collective agreement.

36.                Northern shipbuilding yard of Sudotrest (Leningrad). The collective agreement was discussed by 12 instances (bureau of the VKP (b) cell, plenum, general meeting, etc.) and has recently been discussed daily at meetings           of                 the          conciliation         commission        consisting            of            12 representatives for 2 weeks, but it still remains not signed due to the discrepancy between the administration and the Union on 53 points out of 83, on many points the business executives offer, in comparison with the old collective agreement, worse conditions.

37.                Plant them. Lenin (Saratov). Plant management involves increasing production norms nail shop in a 1 1/ 2 times. The workers, including the candidate and member of the All‐Union Communist Party

(Bolsheviks), sharply opposed the Union and the party: “Our party is MacDonald’s ¹⁴⁴, compromising. Our economy is not moving towards socialism, but is heading towards capitalism. The trade unions play the role of conciliators. The real wages of workers are declining and there is incredible exploitation. ʺ There were calls for a strike.

Miners

38.  Prokopyevsky mine (Kuzbass). The new collective agreement includes clauses on increasing production rates by 10% and introducing an 8‐hour working day for a number of groups (drywall workers, haulers, etc.). When discussing the treaty at a workersʹ meeting, the communists opposed the indicated clauses of the treaty, contrary to the decision of the party meeting. The speeches of both communists and non‐party people were harsh. A resolution was adopted to instruct the Union to strive to maintain the previous production rates and the 6hour working day.

39 Khimzavod (Kuzbass). When discussing a new collective agreement at a meeting of coke oven workers, workers sharply opposed raising the norms and lengthening the working day (up to 8 hours) for a number of workers. A member of the CPSU (b) Vaneev in his speech said: “For what we shed blood. Our comrades laid their heads for freedom, and now new ones have appeared again

capitalists who press and crush the workers in every possible way. ʺ After the speech, Vaneyev fell into hysterics. Other workers (among them three party members) spoke in the same spirit: “Our Union is a traitor to the working class. We negotiated with the business executives for 3 months and agreed — they make them work 8 hours in unbearable conditions — this is a sale of the working class in the same way as MacDonald sold. ʺ During the voting, the points on increasing the norms and lengthening the working day were unanimously rejected.

Food workers

40.                State tobacco factory ʺDukatʺ of Mosselprom (1210 workers). At the delegate meeting (190 people were present), the spokesman for the department of the Union announced the proposals of the trust: to give from 35 to 55% extra earnings for the entire factory, while now the average extra earnings are from 60 to 75%, which will cause a large decrease in wages; introduce an 8‐hour working day in the sleeve, banderovochny, pack and repair departments, and in this regard, a two‐week vacation; to abolish the issue of shoes to courtyards and other workers, to consider overalls as the property of the factory, and not the workers; cancel the issuance of two‐week compensation in the event of dismissal. The workers who spoke in the debate declared: “The party and the trade unions have decided in their decisions at congresses and conferences about the inadmissibility of lowering wages, and now what happens. Productivity increases every year, and our salaries are reduced. It seems that the Union cannot protect us, so why should we support it? We need to disperse it so that they do not take money from us in vain. The trust administration is pressing us as it wants. ʺ Their performances were met with applause and full sympathy from the audience. The workers instructed the Union to uphold the old collective agreement.

41.                Confectionery factory Tsentrosoyuz (Moscow, 721 workers). The general meeting of workers to discuss the draft collective agreement for 1927 was attended by 300. The notes submitted asked: ʺWhy in the 9th year of the revolution they give two weeks of leave, and not a month.ʺ In the debate, the worker, the secretary of the meeting, speaking, said: “Here, comrades, we have been living for 9 years after the revolution, since 1921 we have been taking monthly vacations, and now the comrade leaders want to take away from us two weeks, although they know that leave is for every worker everything and the most important thing. Previously, our country was in a worse position and was given a monthʹs vacation, now the situation has improved, but we see the opposite. ʺ “We must say here a weighty word to the Union, and if we keep silent, our comrades will tell us ‐ you have two weeks of vacation. And in the future ‐ nothing, have a walk and thatʹs enough. ʺ After that, a lot of noise and shouts arose against the Union and the trust. The party members who spoke were not allowed to speak by shouting ʺwe will not listen to you anyway.ʺ After the debate, the Union speaker was not given a closing speech. The meeting decided to seek a monthʹs leave, to equalize the norms and prices with other similar factories, and to leave the trams in the old way, i.e., pay everyone up to the 9th grade.

42.                1st alcohol distillery State Spirit (Moscow, workers 154 people). On January 25, a general meeting of the workers of the plant took place on the collective agreement. After the speeches of the speaker from the Union, who pointed out the abolition of tram money for some categories of workers and the replacement of monthly leave by 2‐week ones, a number of workers spoke out sharply against such a change: and now they give only 2 weeks. Tram money is being cut for us while our heads are driving around in cars. ʺ One of the speakers said: ʺIn what state do we live and who is in powerʺ. After his speech, almost all those present, including here and party members, left the meeting, the meeting was disrupted. Among the workers, conversations were noted: ʺWe will not be allowed to worsen our economic situation by all means.ʺ

On January 29, at a delegate meeting of factory workers, a collective agreement was discussed for the second time, an agreement was not reached.

On February 2, a general meeting of the workers was called on the question of renegotiating the collective agreement — it was stormy. Some party members who spoke out in defense of the new collective agreement were not allowed to speak. As a result, the meeting, by a majority vote (233 against 221), declared the terms of the new collective agreement unacceptable for the workers and decided to submit it to the arbitration court.

43.                Brewery ʺNew Bavaria” Pishchetrest (Leningrad, workers 380 people). The new collective agreement does not include a clause on the right to receive workers for the actual number of days in a month, as it has been so far. The workers, including the member of the All‐Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks Stepanov, said: “The head office of the Union does not comply with the directives of higher bodies to prevent the deterioration of the situation of workers and employees with regard to wages; when the question of the collective agreement is raised at the general meeting, it is necessary to insist on the introduction of this item, and to express distrust to the governor department. ʺ

44.                4th Tabakfabrika (Kiev). No improvement has been achieved under the new collective agreement. On this occasion, in a group of women workers there were conversations that when concluding a collective agreement, only time and money were lost, “it would be better to conclude an agreement for several years at once”.

Communal workers

45.                Road service of the MKH (3rd section, Moscow, workers 1077 people). At the general meeting of workers on the approval of the new collective agreement was attended by 274 people. The debate was attended by up to 15 people. The former foreman who spoke said: “Your paper communists have sold a 2‐week vacation to the business executives, which the workers won during the October

Revolution. Communists and local committees defend only the line of business executives, do not spare the workers and fine them with might and main (record of absenteeism). ʺ He was given a thunderous ovation. After a long debate, the new collective agreement was approved.

46.                Artomonovsky trampark (Moscow). The workers, in connection with the lengthening of the working day and the reduction of vacations, talked about the strike and tried to find out in the local committee and the cell ‐ whether it is possible to organize a strike at the state enterprise. Among them, conversations were noted: ʺKerensky gave one monthʹs leave, but the Soviet regime is now taking it away.ʺ

47.                Trumpark (Saratov). In the traffic shop, according to the new collective agreement, deductions are made from the 20% bonus of conductors for various omissions in service: minor cases of shortage are taken into account, so that the amount of the bonus is negligible in comparison with that received by the train drivers and inspectors. In the last pay, the inspectors received 60‐70 rubles each, the conductor, with various deductions and without a bonus, 18 rubles each. There was such a strong discontent of the entire brigade, numbering 160 people, that they also captured the members of the party. One of the conductors offered to go on strike. The conductor, a member of the AllUnion Communist Party, declares that if they are not allowed to hold a meeting of conductors on this issue, they will not come to work.

Secretary of INFO OGPU Kucherov

APPENDIX No. 2

RE‐ELECTION OF CITIES

Workers

1. Attendance at re‐election meetings

1.                   Leningrad province.  At the enterprises of Leningrad, the attendance of re‐election meetings reaches 80% on average. The Sevkabel plant out of 1479 workers was present in 1156, the Neva factory from 1130‐780, the Red Arsenal from 2630‐2400, the Svetlana factory from 1485‐1317.

2.                   Tula lips.  Attendance at workersʹ meetings ranges from 55 to 98%; employees from 37 to 55%. There was extreme passivity on the part of employees at meetings.

3.                   Saratov province.  Workers and employees of the plant. Lenin came to the meeting in full force. 80% of the Machine Building Plant ʺUniversalʺ and the Boiler Plant.

4.                   F‐ka ʺRed threadʺ.  During the voting, 30% of voters left. At the Krasnoye Znamya factory, the meeting began 1_/2 hour before the end of work, and it was announced to the workers that whoever left the meeting would not be paid for these hours. Among the workers, in this regard, there was talk ‐ ʺinevitably will have to stay.ʺ At the Promet plant, individual workers declared ‐ ʺwe were dragged to the meeting by force, the doors were closed.ʺ

5.                   Ivanovo‐Voznesenskaya province.  At the Puchezh factory of Gostrest, two elective meetings were disrupted due to the absence of workers.

6.                   Ural.  At the Botkin plant, a meeting in the boiler room was scheduled after the first shift. The workers urged the speaker all the time ‐ ʺCome on quickly, donʹt drag it out.ʺ At the plant them. Kolyuschenko at the re‐election meeting was 46%.

2. Criticism of the work of the Soviets

7.                   Izhevsk factories (Votsk region). Some workers, in addition to pointing out the poor improvement of the city, the insufficient fight against homelessness and hooliganism, declared: “We have many pubs on the outskirts, but few or no Leninist corners ¹⁴⁵; we demand that the city council take care of improving the quality of the bricks being produced and increasing its production, otherwise we will all the time huddle in shacks. We have to equip our own brick factory in Izhevsk ourselves”. Some workers pointed out that the city council did not promote the distribution and cheapening of books. Bookstores and kiosks charge more for premises than private sellers. They also pointed to the need to increase teachersʹ salaries.

8.                   In Saratov enterprises, workers put forward demands to lower retail prices, to strengthen the fight against hooliganism, paperwork, drunkenness, prostitution, to strengthen the work of the police for security, equip outpatient clinics, and increase the school network.

9.                   Sverdlovsk District.  At the meetings, workers expressed their dissatisfaction with the construction of a business club: “There was no need to build such a luxurious business club, for which 300,000 rubles were spent. This money had to be spent on workersʹ apartments. ʺ In the Zlatoust Okrug, workers said about the poor improvement of the city, about the high rent.

10.                In a number of factories in Ukraine, workers indicate that the city councils paid little attention to the decline in food prices, “because of the weakness of the work of the city councils, prices not only do not decrease, but rise” (pipe shop of the Dnepropetrovsk plant). In most cases, it was pointed to poor living conditions of the workers.

11.                In Samara, the following requirements were put forward at the enterprises: to take the most stringent measures to combat hooliganism; lower tuition fees for children in primary schools, pay more attention to urban outskirts, and increase the number of red corners instead of pubs.

3. Opposition speeches

12.                Tula province.  At a meeting of workers of the carriage workshops of MK zh. e. one of the workers said: “We, the workers, must choose our own, and not those who are given to us by the party, we will find workers who are better and more honest. Now the same thing that happened under Nicholas II, but we sit and blink our eyes, we need to organize. ʺ

13.                Ivanovo‐Voznesenskaya province.  At the Spinning Factory No. 2 of the Gostrest (city of Shuya), a former member of the All‐Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) said: “We all need to be more organized and, in opposition to the cell, it is necessary to create non‐party factions, which, like the cell, would discuss one or the other in advance. a political issue or a campaign and on their own would nominate non‐partisan candidates. ʺ

4. Party membersʹ speeches

14.   Horseshoe plant (Leningrad). One member of the All‐Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks said in his speech: “Although we have reached the pre‐war quantity of products, we are far behind in quality and price. The wages are very low compared to the pre‐war level. The peasants are still in a worse position since their products are completely devalued. Skilled workers are deprived of the ʺhuman conditions of existence.ʺ This party member, when voting to recognize the work of the Council as correct, voted against.

15.   Gorvod (Leningrad). The worker (a member of the CPSU) said: ʺIt is necessary to equalize the wages so that all workers receive the same.ʺ

16.   Plant ʺKrasny Vyborzhets” (Leningrad). A worker (a member of the CPSU) spoke at the meeting with the following statement: “The Jew crawls up everywhere. In the Pargolovskaya hospital, only Jews drain fat. We have to fight them”.

17.   5th power plant (Leningrad). The candidate of the All‐Union

Communist Party of Bolsheviks declared at the re‐election meeting: “The campaign to reduce prices has not yielded any results. The economy is carried out at the expense of the workers. ʺ

18.   Factory ʺNeva” (Leningrad). A group of party members in a sharp form demanded the candidacy of one member of the CPSU (b), when they were refused, one of the party members said: ʺYou do not want to reckon with the workers, so you shouldnʹt have called us here.ʺ This candidacy was nominated by them in addition to the cell list.

19.   Printing House (Leningrad). On February 7, a member of the AllUnion Communist Party of Bolsheviks, Vasiliev, rejected the candidacies          of            the          collective,            of            which    one         candidate             was failed. Vasiliev himself was elected. Due to the fact that Vasiliev was expelled from the party, a general meeting of workers was held on February 26, at which the issue of recalling Vasiliev from the Leningrad City Council was discussed. On February 27, by a majority of votes, Vasiliev was withdrawn and replaced by a non‐party member.

5. Withdrawal of candidates for responsible party and co‐workers and business executives

20.                F‐ka ʺOctober Revolution” (Leningrad). Some workers took the candidacy of assistant. director. The challenge was a success and help. director failed.

21.                F‐ka ʺKrasnaya Thread” (Leningrad). At the factory assembly of the Director has opposed candidacy worker stove‐maker, after a 2 ¹ / 2 hours. During the debate, the director was voted down. Some workers who spoke out pointed out that ʺthe director is a bad business executive, a bureaucrat, abuses his position and is inattentive to work.ʺ

22.                Factory ʺRed Weaver” (Leningrad). At the meeting, the candidacy of the red director failed.

23.                Metal Plant (Leningrad).  At the re‐election meeting, the candidacy of the chairman of the Mashtrest was defeated. His candidacy was rejected by a number of departments of the plant.

24.                F‐ka them. Khalturina Leningradtekstiltrest. The workers rejected the candidacy of the executive secretary of the Central City District and the Pre‐District Executive Committee of the CGR.

25.                Plant ʺElectric” GET. At the re‐election meeting, the workers rejected the candidacy of the executive secretary of the Petrograd region. The motives for the withdrawal were the fact that ʺthese party workers areʺ strangers ʺand are not associated with production.ʺ The recusals were unsuccessful, as the majority of voters were not supported.

Unemployed

26.                Leningrad.  At the meeting of unemployed transport workers on February 3, instead of 3120 people appeared ‐ 250; the meeting did not take place. Meetings of unemployed educators and unemployed railway workers of the North‐West railway. were held with a small number of those present (at 4 meetings out of 7000 people, 2100 were present).

27.                Tula province.  Some meetings among unemployed metalworkers were disrupted due to the small number of those present. In two districts of the city only 13% out of 1950 were present. The meetings were called again. In the Chulkovsky district, only 40 people attended the meeting, called a second time.

28.                Leningrad.  At a meeting of unemployed railway workers, a member of the CPSU made a proposal: to recognize the work of the Leningrad City Council of the 10th convocation unsatisfactory. 119 people voted for this proposal. At a meeting of unemployed educators from three districts, one of the unemployed said: ʺThe Leningrad City Council of the 10th convocation gave us 130,000 unemployed, and the Leningrad Council of the 11th convocation will give us even moreʺ (applause).

29.                Moscow.  Among the unemployed metalworkers, one unemployed said: “We have a lot of unemployment because the Bolsheviks squeeze private production. Let private workshops be given the opportunity to work on the same conditions as the state, then they will see that private traders will manufacture better goods and cheaper and will give work to many workers. Monopoly of production ‐ Jewish policy”. Among the unemployed garment workers, one unemployed said: “Our situation is deteriorating, unemployment is increasing, and at the same time

hunger, theft, prostitution, and hooliganism are growing. We must find this way out only ourselves. The communists are a group of wealthy people, they donʹt understand us. Our rights must be defended by our own forces, we must organize ourselves, because only in the struggle will you acquire your right. ʺ

30.                Leningrad.  Among the unemployed metalworkers of the Vyborg district at the re‐election meeting, exclamations were heard: ʺDisperse the Union, long live the new bourgeoisie.ʺ A note was submitted to the presidium with a proposal to allow the demonstration device. At a meeting of metalworkers in the Petrogradsky District, one of the unemployed said: ʺWe do not need either the Union or the government.ʺ

31.                Moscow.  In Bogorodsky, in the elections to the city council, candidates nominated by the party cell were defeated under the influence of campaigning by a group of 4 people led by the former head of the Ivanovsky district police department. Three people were selected from the group. This group demanded the inclusion of a clause on increasing unemployment benefits in the mandate.

32.                Tula.  In the Central District, the majority of those present began to protest against the list put forward by the regional committee of the Metalworkersʹ Union. The meeting decided to remove the list and nominate candidates from among those present.

One of the unemployed said: ʺWe need to bring to the Soviet such deputies who would stand for the truth, and would not play one trick with the communists, it is necessary that from the minutes of our meeting the Central Committee could see how the Tula workers are dying of hunger.ʺ

Intelligentsia

33.                Leningrad.  In the State Russian Museum, the candidates put forward by the bureau of the collective of the CPSU (b) ‐ the director of the museum (member of the CPSU) and a non‐partisan employee ‐ were failed. Before the meeting, the chairman of the local committee and two scientific workers campaigned against the election of the director and for the election of only non‐party members. In hospitals (named after Bekhterev and named after Rauchfus), the lists displayed by the cells were completely failed. At the meeting of the 52nd, 53rd, 54th and 55th group committees and the 93‐94th local committees of the Rabpros, both the list of the collective of the All‐Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks and the trade union activists were defeated, and the candidates nominated by the meeting were elected. At Leningrad University, after the list of the cell was announced, one student proposed on her behalf a list consisting exclusively of non‐party students close to anti‐Soviet professors.

34.                North Caucasus.  In the mountains. Novocherkassk, at a meeting of scientific workers, the candidacy of a member of the CPSU (b) was failed. After the announcement of the order, one professor said: ʺWe should not impose an order, since we are not communists,ʺ only nonparty people were elected.

35.                Leningrad.  At a joint meeting of the provincial health department and the Central Dental Clinic, after the failure of the list of candidates for the City Council put forward by doctors, a group of doctors (15 people) left the meeting. A group of doctors from the Institute of Experimental Medicine also defiantly left the meeting. Similar phenomena took place at other meetings of doctors.

36.                Ukraine.  Among some of the professors of the mountains. Kharkiv, there is talk of the need to sabotage the elections. Some professors say that “price cuts are a new trick for the Soviet regime in connection with the re‐elections. Reducing prices will go down the drain immediately after the re‐election of the Soviets. ʺ

37.                Leningrad.  At the meetings of 14 group committees, anti‐Soviet teachers showed great activity. The teacher and delegate of the 55th Soviet school, long before the re‐election meeting, went to School 46 and campaigned among the delegates to reject party members. This teacher said: ʺExplain all this to your tens.ʺ In schools, united by the 19th and 20th group committees, an active campaign was waged for the election of anti‐Soviet teachers to the Council and for the failure of party candidates. The teacher and delegate of the 46th Soviet school went to the 54th school and agitated among the teachers, declaring: ʺWe must withdraw the communists who are nominated to the Soviet.ʺ

At a meeting of students of the Technological Institute, an anonymous note was submitted to the speaker: ʺWho is shooting now, elective or hired, are there any special executioners now, how much they get paid for this, monthly or from each head.ʺ

Groupings

38.  Vladikavkaz.  Several groups were organized among the sectarian population. Baptist and Molokan Sects ¹⁴⁶ under the influence of the agitation of their leaders, who have been deprived of voting rights, they are developing a lot of organizational work directed against the elections to the Council of Party members and Komsomol members. The first group (Molokan), headed by the chairman of the Council of the Molokan community (a former member of the city council, deprived of the election in the current campaign). In addition to the Molokans, this group includes Baptists, including one former Socialist‐Revolutionary. The social composition of the group is cabbies, handicraftsmen, artisans, merchants, kulaks. Everyday community leaders gather large groups of the population around them, pointing out that “the deprivation of voting rights is an injustice and that we did more for the Soviet regime with weapons in our hands in 1918 and 1919 than the communists ‐ the communists hid and the preachers organized defense. Why are the leaders of the atheists not deprived of their electoral rights?

On January 23, the district council appointed a meeting. The Molokans and Baptists also organized their meetings, announcing that those who did not appear would be expelled from the community. The meetings were called ostensibly for the purpose of re‐registering community members. On the same day, the Baptist convention ended, and before it closed, the leaders of the community suggested that outsiders leave the prayer house, after which the question of re‐election was subject to lively discussion. They talked about the need to promote only ʺour ownʺ to the Soviet and about measures to counter the communists. As a result, out of 4,000 voters in the Molokan suburb, only 150 attended the re‐election meeting.

The second group consists exclusively of Baptists and is led by the chairman of the community, also a former member of the city council. The third group consists of members of the ʺEconomyʺ cooperative. Most of them are fists. The group is headed by the chairman of the board, kulak. Members of the group also include Baptists and Molokans. The work of these groups is reduced not only to open campaigning in the street, but also to campaigning from home. Many members give detailed instructions at home for the upcoming re‐election.

The attitude of the sectarians towards party members and Komsomol members changed for the worse. Cell announcements that were previously read at congregation meetings in prayer rooms are no longer read.

In the Kursk suburb, a group of kulaks and the well‐to‐do was organized under the leadership of a former Menshevik and a former white officer. The group is campaigning among the population ʺfor the nomination of their people to the Council.ʺ

Secretary of INFO OGPU Kucherov

APPENDIX No. 3

ELECTION OF VILLAGE COUNCILS

I. Work to organize the poor

a) High attendance at poor meetings

1.                   Leningrad province.  March 1. (Northwest). Lodeynopolsky u. In the Kondush society, two meetings of the poor were held, at which the poor were 100% present. Even the poor came who were not invited to the meeting.

2.                   Arkhangelsk lips.  February 23. Arkhangelsk u. Isakogorsk parish in the village. Tarnokurye, 57% of the total number of poor people attended the meetings of the poor. When discussing the candidacies outlined by the cell of the CPSU (b), the meeting replaced the candidacies of two members of the Komsomol for their rude attitude towards the population.

3.                   In Shenkurskiy u. in 25 districts, meetings of the poor were held, at which 307 poor people out of 545 poor people were present, as well as 58 middle peasants and two kulaks. Questions were asked by 89 poor peasants, 40 by middle peasants. 33 poor and 19 middle peasants spoke in the debate on the report.

4.                   Bryansk lips.  February    17           (West). Karachevsky       u. Along               the Karachevskaya Vol. during the re‐election campaign of village councils, 12 meetings of the poor were held with the participation of 7595% of the poor, in the village. Rechitsa from 48 poor households attended the meeting of 40 people in the village. Wet at a meeting of 60 people 41 appeared.

5.                   Samara province.  February 10 (Volga region). Pugachevsky u. Along Berezovo‐Luki vol. attendance at meetings by the poor is significant. In with. Durasovka attended a meeting of 95% of the poor, in the village. Matveevka       ‐                 100%; in               Berezovo‐Lukovo             95%,       in            the village. Grigorievka ‐ 75%, in Dubovoy ‐ 73.5%, in Orlovka ‐ 53%. At these meetings, 154 candidates were nominated to the new village councils, of whom 62% are poor and 35% are middle peasants.

6.                   Samara district In Bogdanovskaya parish. the poor used to go to meetings almost never, but now every single one goes to meetings.

7.                   Minusinsk District.  February 10. (Siberia). In the district in three months, 324 meetings of the poor were held, which were attended by about 30,000 people.

8.                   Biysk district.  January 31st. The poor are very active in their meetings. Poor meetings cover 70‐80% of the poor, and in some villages ‐ up to 90‐100%. Up to 20‐25% of the middle peasants are present at the meetings of the poor.

b) Ignoring the middle peasants

9.                   Belarus.  February 5th. (West). In the village. The Great Forest of the Sokolniki Village Council groups of the poor gathered apart from the middle peasants. The latter were offended by this and did not go to the re‐election: ʺWe will not go to the re‐election, since we are counted among the kulaks.ʺ

10.                Krasnoslobodsky district. In the village. M. Rozhin during the meeting of the poor, the leader of the meeting removed the present middle peasants. The latter, expressing their dissatisfaction, say: ʺYour meeting is illegal and we can protest, because there are no underground meetings.ʺ

11.                Bryansk lips.  February 17. Starodubsky u. At a general meeting of citizens in the village. Delinky, when nominating candidates for the village council, the middle peasants said: “We are not invited to a poor meeting, but at a general meeting, whoever wants whom, chooses. We need to get down to business so that we are not separated from the poor. ʺ “Why is it not a general meeting that nominates candidates, but some group. If they do so, then let us all go home now ‐ let them run and elect to the village council themselves, and we, citizens, have nothing to come to the re‐elections either, let only the poor choose. ʺ

12.                Glukhovsky district.  February 20th. (Ukraine). Shostensky district. In with. Iwata, even during the election campaign, there was a tendency for the poor not to send middle peasants to the village council. At the meeting of the KNS asset, which was attended by up to 170 people, the poor declared: ʺWe do not need the middle peasants, why will we expose them.ʺ A similar mood among the poor p. Cellars in the same area, which clearly affected the re‐elections, where 63% of the poor, 6% of the middle peasants, members of the CP (b) U ‐ 19% and members of the trade union ‐ 12% were at the meeting. The poor said: ʺIf the poor are in the village council, then the business is reliable, but for the sake of appearance you can lead a couple of middle peasants.ʺ

c) The predominance of the middle peasants and the wealthy at the poor meetings

13.   Belarus.  February 5th. (West). Rechitsa district. In the Kholmen district, meetings of groups of the poor were held in almost all villages. The meetings were attended by from one‐half to one‐half of the total number of the poor. The middle peasants who attended the meetings of the poor made up 30% of all participants in the meetings, and in some places the middle peasants made up the majority at the poor meetings.

14.   Bryansk province.  February 27. Surazh vol. In with. Dubrovka, the meeting of the poor was attended by the poor 30 people, the middle peasants ‐ 40.

15.   In Starodubsky u. in the same province, the poor showed themselves less actively than last year. The majority of the poor were present at the meetings of the middle peasants, while the poor, under the influence of the well‐to‐do, took little part in the re‐election. In with. Kazilovka Yudinovskaya parish not a single poor person spoke on the report and on the issue of nominations.

16.   Leningrad      province.  February

23. (Northwest). Trotsky Vengisarovskaya Vol. In the village. Glum people at the meeting of the poor were attended mainly by the wealthy and middle peasants, while the poor were attended by a very small number. The meeting of the poor took on the character of a general meeting. Two of those present ‐ well‐to‐do (preachers of the Baptist sect) opposed the candidates designated by the wolf of the CPSU (b): “Why does the wolf impose candidates. After all, we know better who fits and who doesnʹt. ʺ

17.  Tomsk District.  February 10. (Siberia). V. Chebulinsky district. In with. In Novo‐Kazanka, the representative of the RIK held a poor meeting, at which the majority were not poor, but middle and wealthy. Candidates for the village council were nominated mainly by the wealthy, and the poor, feeling the superiority of the middle peasants and the wealthy, did not nominate their candidates. After the meeting, the poor declared: ʺIt is wrong that they have gathered everyone for a poor meeting, it was necessary to gather only the poor, otherwise the candidates from the poor will not get to the village council.ʺ

II. Work on deprivation of voting rights a) Deprivation of election rights of a part of the middle peasants

18.                Odessa district.  (Ukraine). There have been many registered cases of deprivation of electoral rights of middle peasants for having threshers and straw cutters “as exploiters”.

19.                Melitopol district.  In with. Many middle peasants with large orchards are deprived of the right to vote in Novaya Filippovka. In with. Voznesenka was deprived of his voice for the middle peasant for

70 years for being a church headman before the revolution.

20.                Kamensk district.  (Siberia). In the Pankrushikhinsky district, due to the erroneous understanding of the instructions by the district election committee, the deprivation of election rights was applied to all peasants using hired labor, regardless of the conditions of the peasant economy, and as a result, out of 1109 people deprived of election rights for hiring workers, 485 people are middle peasants who use auxiliary hired labor. work.

21.                Donskoy district.  February 16. (North Caucasus). The RodionoNesvetaevsky election commission has deprived up to 16% of the total number of voters. There, in the hut. Znamenka is deprived of election rights for 35% of voters. In addition, among those deprived of election rights, there are 13 members of the village council and a member of the DIK.

22.                Krasnoyarsk District.  February 10. (Siberia). 5 middle peasants (all former partisans) were deprived of election rights by the partisan RIK for selling meat at the bazaar. The latter, expressing their dissatisfaction, said: ʺIn 1919 we were in the taiga, with a rifle we defended the Soviet government ‐ then we were needed, but now the Soviet government does not need us.ʺ Concerning the deprivation of their electoral rights, there is talk among the peasants: “They have deprived our peasants of their voice, and who will say what the peasants have in their hearts. If so, then it is necessary to deprive the vote and before the RIK, he is also above the middle peasant. ʺ “Our workers do not know the Soviet law and there is no need to try to govern the people. The central government and the party improve the situation, but in the localities they spoil it and restore the peasants against the government. ʺ

b) Other mistakes and shortcomings in the work of election commissions

23.                Tambov province.  February 26. (Centre). Tambovskiy u. The former head of the detachment for combating desertion and banditry (against the Antonov gang), who at one time was the chairman of the revolutionary committee, was deprived of the right to vote because he hired a shepherd boy for the summer. There she is also deprived of electoral rights, as the daughter of a priest, a teacher, who from the beginning of the revolution until 1921 worked as a sister of mercy in the Red Army and now actively participates in public work (a member of the village council and secretary of the KKOV), although she lives separately from her father.

24.                Shakhtinsko‐Donetsk          district.  (North Caucasus). In     Tatsinsky, Morozovsky, Shakhtinsky, Stulsky and Belokalitvensky districts, a number of cases of deprivation of the right to vote of the families of the Red Army soldiers were noted, who, at the time of the conscription of their workers into the army, hired farm laborers for the summer; at the same time, there are cases of non‐deprivation of the election rights of kulaks, as well as tenants of mines.

25.                Armavir District.  In stts. Grigoriopolis, the Terarmy were included in the list of deprived of their rights. In the hut. Sokolovsky, Kropotkinsky district, a former Red Army soldier who has a threshing set in the company with other fellow villagers was included in the list of ʺdisenfranchisedʺ.

26.                Terek District.  In the Suvorov District, a Red Army soldier who is in active military service was deprived of his election rights for the fact that his father uses hired labor; the wife of another Red Army is devoid izbirprav because during the absence of her husband she lived with her father, who is a laborer, there were several cases of deprivation izbirprav peremennikov for what their parents during the absence peremennikov on tersbore ¹⁴⁷ hired laborers.

27.                Saratov province.  (Volga region). In with. Balashi was deprived of the election rights of the middle peasant, who served in the Red Army, for the fact that he led the church choir on Easter last year.

28.                Stalingrad             province.  February           20th. Khopersky                district, stts. Uryupinskaya. In the hut. In the beginning, 88 people were deprived         of            their       electoral               rights    by           the          agricultural committee. Subsequently, the Commissioner of the Stanizbirkom, finding that the number of “disenfranchised” was too large, left only one person on the list of “disenfranchised” (the rest were thus reinstated). Such a decision of the ombudsman caused strong discontent among the population since they were restored to their rights as persons who were clearly subject to deprivation according to instructions.

 

29.                In  2nd Don district in the stc. Potemkinskaya to the hut. The owner of the water mill, who has hired workers, is not deprived of the right to vote. When asked why the miller is not deprived of his voice, the representative of the Stanizbirkom answered “for peace of mind, in order to get rid of all sorts of groupings and buzz.”

30.                Kamensk district.  (Siberia). In the Pankrushikha district, the election commission deprived the middle peasants of the vote by dozens because they had laborers, which caused panic in the entire village.

31.                Zavyalovsky district. Two members of the CPSU were among the deprived of the electoral rights. The motives for the deprivation of electoral rights were the purchase of cattle by the latter on behalf of the cooperatives.

32.                Omsk District.  According to the Lublin village council, 110 people of peasants who have threshers, reapers, hay‐mowers have been deprived of their election rights, for giving them to the side.

33.                Khakass district.  In one of the village councils, 119 people were deprived of [electoral rights] for the fact that one of their close relatives (father, mother, brother, wife, son‐in‐law, brotherʹs wife, etc.) is on trial.

34.                Novosibirsk district.  In with. Ovchinnikovo, persons over 55 were struck off the voter list.

35.                Tomsk District.  The chairman of one credit partnership was deprived of election rights for the fact that he did not help the poor peasants, the hut ‐ for the fact that his grandfather, being a merchant, gave him to his father to feed.

36.                Barabinsky district.  Members of the Menshikov agricultural electoral committee went door‐to‐door, looked at old photographs, and those who were found to have two stripes were deprived of the right to vote, and also deprived of their votes and members of their families.

III. Poor in elections 1. Activity of the poor

37.                Voronezh province.  12th of February. (Centre). Bogucharsky u. At the re‐election in the next. Popovka Bogucharskaya Vol. the poor came together against an organized group of the wealthy, defending their candidates. The organizer, nominated by the wealthy as a candidate for  village council, was turned down after the poor peasant who spoke out said: “The candidate being nominated for the village council is not good; he is a former contractor, deprived of electoral rights (now restored by the district election commission), a drunkard, organizing the wealthy around him and disrupting our work.

38.                Belarus.  February 5th. (West). Kalinkovsky district. The poor took a more active part in the re‐elections of the Lipovsky village council compared to last year. In the village. Khomichi at the re‐election meeting was attended by 105 people, of whom the poor ‐ 37 people, the middle peasants ‐ 50 people and the wealthy ‐ 19. Despite the fact that the poor were in the minority, candidates nominated by the poor became members of the village council. The latter, addressing the wellto‐do, declared: “We now know whom to elect, this is not the last year for you, that you were holding your own, including the current previllage council; although he is a communist, he did not listen to the voice of the poor — it is enough for him to mock us. ʺ

39.                Zlatoust district.  1st of February. (Ural). Miass district. During the re‐election of the Kundravinsky village council, the poor, together with the party members, actively opposed the prosperous candidates. ʺIt is not necessary to bring such a person to the Council, since it has a connection with the kulaks.ʺ ʺHe must be relieved of his duties as a candidate, he is a religious person, he goes to church, and he will not have time to go to meetings.ʺ

40.                Chelyabinsk District.  1st of February. Etkul district. During the reelections of a number of village soviets, the activity of the poor was noted in nominating their candidates to the village soviet and speaking out against the candidacies of the kulaks: “Eat your fist well, but none of the poor will let you around. We know you, there is nothing to pretend. ʺ

2. Kombedovsky bias

41.                Voronezh province.  January 27 (Center). In sl. At the reporting meeting in the first electoral district in Kulikovka, three poor people spoke at the reporting meeting in the first electoral district, and pointed out that only the poor need to be elected to the village council, ʺgiving them  opportunity to distribute loans to raise agriculture, and then loans will mostly go to poor farms.ʺ

42.                Oryol province.  February 19. In with. Livensky Lamskoy Vol of Yeletsky u. at the meeting of the poor, the poor said: ʺWe need to elect only the poor to the Council, and now we need such a Council that would protect the interests of the poor.ʺ

43.                Ryazan lips.  February 17. In with. Libraries of Kasimovsky u. at a meeting of the poor, after a proposal to nominate the poor and middle peasants to the village council, one of those present said: ʺWe do not need the middle peasants, since they will defend their interests.ʺ

44.                Zaporozhye district.  February 15. (Ukraine). In the Tomakovsky district, at the reporting meeting of the Ilyinsky village council, a member of the RIK who spoke said: “Last year the government gave wide democracy, as a result of which the middle peasants, kulaks and the wealthy entered the government. And the poor were removed from power and they were trailing behind, so this year there was a question about the need to bring the poor to the authorities, and let the wealthy and the middle peasant lag behind, and accordingly the instructions for re‐elections were developed.

45.                Nikolaev district.  February 15. (Ukraine). In the Kalinovsky village council they say: ʺAnother moment fell on our head, in order to take power into our own hands, we need to use this moment.ʺ

46.                Odessa district.  February 15. In with. Petrovka, Berezovsky district, the poor and farm laborers declare: ʺWe will now elect our poor and there should not be a single middle peasant in the future village council.ʺ

47.                Samara province.  January 15. (Volga region). In Samarskoye, in a number of villages, at pre‐election meetings, the poor raised the issue of organizing exclusively ʺpoor village councils.ʺ

3. Refusal of the poor to elect them to the Soviets

48.                Shepetivka district.  February 15. (Ukraine). In with. Sudimont of the Sudilkovsky district of the KNS is not preparing at all for reelections. Non‐self‐employed people say that it makes no difference to them who will be the pre‐village council — a member of the CNS or a

 

wealthy one. pointing out, “if there is someone from the well‐to‐do, it will be even better, since he does not need anything and can serve, and an unmarried person needs to earn money, since the received 20 rubles. no one can live with his family a month. ʺ

49.                Biysk district.  1st of February. (Siberia). In with. At the pre‐election meeting of the Smolensk District, a poor man who spoke at the election meeting said: “To elect the poor to the village council means undermining the poor economy, and the kulaks will be free from public works, they will develop their economy and get rich, and it’s in vain that they say that the poor must stay in power, and as he is elected, he is in the majority on the errand, and the fist commands from the side. ʺ

50.28 March. In with. Uch‐Pristani poor people, refusing to work in the village council, declare: ʺAnd so our economy is weak, and then it will completely collapse, in addition, we do not want to serve the wealthy.ʺ

51.                Irkutsk District.  The 25th of January. “Representatives of the highest authorities keep repeating that it is necessary to nominate and elect the poor and middle peasants to the village councils. True, it is decent to listen and it is flattering for our brother that we are being forced to rule the state, but one thing is bad, that they do not take into account the situation in which we find ourselves. Frankly speaking between us, our economy, which another has to put together for years, is destroyed in a year so that after service it is difficult to collect the remains. In my opinion, you need to choose more powerful middle peasants and, if a good guy, then you can also from the wealthy. ʺ

52.                Tomsk District.  February 15. In the village Pudovsky, Krivosheinsky district, at a meeting of the poor, the poor said: “It is impossible to serve the poor for free, and therefore we need to elect to the village council someone who can serve for free, without harming our economy. How to choose from the poor, when the poor live poorly, and when he works in the village council, he will have to lose his working time three days a week, and if only the poor get to the village council, then his last farm will collapse. ʺ

IV. The position of the middle peasants in the elections

1 Middle and Poor Bloc

53.                Donskoy district.  February 15. (North Caucasus.) In the first quarter in the next. Krasyukovskaya most active participation in the reelections was shown by the poor, which was also supported by the middle peasants. In the third quarter, the poor, rallying the farm laborers around themselves, as well as most of the middle peasantry, failed the candidacies of the wealthy, the list proposed by the cell of the CPSU (b) passed entirely.

54.                Smolensk province.  February 22. (West). Smolensky u. During the re‐election of the Preobrazhensky village council Moshchinskaya vol. the well‐to‐do part of the village tried to run their candidacies, but, thanks to the organization of the poor and middle peasants, who spoke together, the well‐to‐doʹs candidates were thwarted.

55.                Kherson district.  February 15. (Ukraine). In with. Bereznegovatom election meetings of the poor are held with the participation of the middle peasants. At one of the poor peasantsʹ meetings, the middle peasant who spoke said: “In the last re‐elections we conducted our candidates to the village council uncoordinatedly, you voted against us, and we against you and failed each otherʹs candidates; this year we need to jointly select and discuss candidates and, by all means, get them to the village council. ʺ

56.                Ulyanovsk province.  February 19. (Volga region). At the pre‐election meeting in the village. Maze Novodevichy parish when discussing the candidates outlined by the poor and middle peasants group and the party cell, the local kulaks tried to fail them: “We don’t need your candidates, don’t impose ours, we will designate our own,” but thanks to the solidarity of the poor and middle peasants, the majority in the voting remained on the side of the latter, and the efforts of the kulaks did not get them anywhere.

2. Independent performances of the middle peasants

57.                Moscow province.  February 19. (Centre). Podolsky in with. Bakunino Shchebantsevskaya Vol. in contrast to the list of the cell, the middle peasant proposed another list, outlined at a meeting of peasants without the participation of the VIK and party

organizations. During the voting, the list passed by the peasant.

58.                Ivanovo‐Voznesenskaya     province.  5th       of            March. Yuriev‐Polsky u. When holding a meeting of the poor in the village. Turabov, the head of the meeting (sovart‐school member ¹⁴⁸) demanded the removal from the meeting of the candidate of the CPSU (b) who had just returned from the Red Army, as a middle peasant. The latter, indignant at the action of the communist ring, at first protested against his removal from the meeting, but then organized a separate meeting of the middle peasants, at which candidates for the village council from the middle peasants were outlined.

59.                Arkhangelsk province.  February 23. (Northwest). In the Okulovsky village council, Isakogorskaya vol. Arkhangelsk u. the middle peasants created a group with the aim of disrupting the list of candidates for the village council, nominated by the cell and the poor. The motive of its opposition to the poor, the group put forward the following considerations: ʺThe poor, being in the village council, will not help the middle peasants, but rather do harm, and as a result, the tax will increase next year.ʺ

60.                Smolensk lips.  February 22. (West). Sychevsky. In the village. Grudinino, Kapustinsky district, Artemovskaya vol. even before the elections, a group of middle peasants won over some of the poor to their side, thanks to which they managed to get their candidates into the village council. Having learned that she was deceived, the poor have filed a complaint with the electoral committee with a request to cash in ¹⁴⁹ re‐elections.

61.                Donetsk district.  February              15. (North            Caucasus). In     the Olkhovchansk village council, in some districts, the separation of the middle peasants from the poor was noted, and both those and others voted exclusively for their candidates.

62.                Kherson district.  (Ukraine). In with. Bereznegovatoe in the same area between the middle peasants and the poor is noted for antagonism. Some middle peasants, calling the poor peasants ʺdronesʺ, speak out against the election of the poor peasants and farm laborersʹ candidates, declaring that ʺit will be necessary to elect non‐party middle peasants to the Council.ʺ

63.                Nikolaev district.  25 February. In with. K. Shpeerovo of the Liebknekhtovsky district from the list proposed by the KNS, only two candidates passed, the rest, despite the insistence of the election commission, were failed by an organized group of middle peasants, which nominated their candidates to the list and voted for them. Voting lasted 4 hours.

64.                Krivoy Rog district.  25 February. For the re‐election of the Bozhedarovsky village council, the middle peasants came with their family members in full force and organized their candidates. As a result, among the 13 people elected to the village council, there is not a single poor person.

65.                Konotop district.  February 29. In with. On the day of the re‐election, a group of middle peasants of up to 50 people gathered on the street in Podolove of the Krolevetsky district and discussed the issue of electing their candidates to the village council. At the re‐election meeting after the list of the active was announced, representatives of the middle peasant group said: ʺWe do not want this list and we will not vote.ʺ As a result of the organized performance of the middle peasants, out of 17 people elected to the village council, 11 middle peasants passed.

66.                Kiev district.  28th of February. In with. The middle peasants of the Pereyaslavsky district acted independently, trying to lead as many middle peasants as possible. However, the poor peasants, who were numerically predominant at the meeting, had the advantage and held 13 poor peasants and three middle peasants.

61. Don district.  25 February. (North Caucasus). In the Azov region, during the re‐elections of the 2nd Poltava village council, the middle peasants, united into an independent group, voted exclusively for the candidacies of the middle peasants, declaring: “After all, we choose the owner of the village, but what the hell will be the owner if we choose the one who never ruled ʺ.

68.                Samara province.  February 20th. (Volga region). Samara district the composition of the village councils with. Bridges of Obsharovskaya par. and c. Beloozerka Bugry‐Kinelskaya Vol. are mostly middle peasants. The middle peasants did not vote for the nominated candidates for the poor, sending only the middle peasants to the village council. The violation of the poor‐middle peasant bloc is the result of the discontent of the middle peasants that ʺthey are not equally valued in comparison with the poor.ʺ

69.                Trinity District.  February 10. (Ural). Bredinsky district. During the re‐elections in the village. Poslednitsky middle peasants spoke for their candidacy: ʺWe, as middle peasants, nominate our candidate and everyone speaks for him, we do not hurt others.ʺ As a result of the vote, they managed to hold the pre‐village council of the former colonel, but who served in the Red Army and has the Order of the Red Banner, who was involved in Bolshevism with whites and enjoyed great prestige among farm laborers and the poor.

70.                Ishim District.  January 10. Berdyuzhsky district. At the re‐election meeting in the village. Vorobyevo, the middle peasants, after unsuccessfully nominating their candidates who did not get into the village council, demonstratively abstained from voting for the candidates nominated by the representative of the RIK.

3. Speaking against the lists

71.                Moscow province.  March 7. (Centre). In with. Kozino Eremeevskaya parish Voskresensky u. After the list of the cell was announced, the middle peasant who spoke said: “I propose to elect from the society, but this list should be thrown out. There was no need to collect the poor because society could better map out. ʺ As a result of voting, out of 7 candidates recommended by the poor, only two passed.

72.                In the village. Velyaminovo Luchinsky par. Voskresensky u. the middle peasant, opposing the list of the cell, said: ʺWe do not need the lists of the cell, but we need to nominate our candidates who would not work as the communists want, but how the peasants are interested.ʺ The performance was supported mainly by the well‐todo. The cellʹs candidacies were partially rejected.

73.                Voronezh province. February 22. Bogucharsky u. and parish. In sl. Poltavskaya at the election meeting, the middle peasants opposed the candidacies of the communists and the poor: “In no case should you elect to the Council of Communists, it is enough that they used to be in the village council and did nothing. There was one communist in our country who drank incessantly, drank the peopleʹs money, who died at the table with a bottle in his hands. And now there is no one to ask, since he was a poor man. You need to elect economic people to the village council, but you donʹt need to raise your hands for the communists. ʺ “What kind of a village council will it be when the poor and young people are elected there? They are poor, in their own household they cannot give harmony, and they also climb up to conduct public affairs. And young people need to learn well and live in the world, otherwise they didn’t have time to get out of the cradle, but they are already poking into power”.

74.                At the re‐elections of the Shatalovsky village council, the middle peasants declared: “The party and local authorities impose their candidates. In the tenth year of the revolution, the party should not command, but go with the masses. The masses themselves know whom to choose and will never choose the famous rich man in Shatalovka and his minions. ʺ “The list was rigged by the village committee since the poor were nominated as candidates at the meeting of the poor. And now instead of poor people, members of the All‐Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks and an accountant of the PO, who failed at a poor meeting ‐ they must not only be thrown off the list, but also from the meeting. As a result, the meeting introduced 12 candidates, and the candidates nominated by the meeting of the poor, with the exception of one, were voted down, and only the middle peasants entered the village council.

75.                Arkhangelsk lips.  (Northwest). In the village. Kuzmina Kehotsk parish Arkhangelsk u. at the re‐election meeting, the middle peasants, speaking out against the candidates nominated at the meeting of the poor, declared: ʺWe did not want to go against the list of candidates put forward by the poor, but we were offended why we were not invited and we were dealing only with the poor.ʺ

76.                Sumy district.  February 20th. (Ukraine). In with. At the re‐election meeting, Slavgorod, after reading the list of candidates recommended by the CNS and the party cell, the middle peasant, having declared that putting up the lists takes away any initiative, suggested that the lists be rejected as a whole and that candidates should be nominated from the seats.

77.                In p. Boromle of the same district, after the proposal of the list on behalf of the asset, there was a stir in the building, mainly from the middle peasants. The middle peasant who spoke said: ʺSomeone constantly gravitates over the peasantry.ʺ He asked: ʺWhy are we being assembled then, when the question of the future composition has already been decided.ʺ Shouts from the localities, basically, boiled down to the fact that the peasants themselves can nominate worthy people. After the speech of the pre‐election commission, which explained the meaning of the list proposed by the asset, it was accepted as a basis. The addition to the list has exceeded the number of those on the list. The asset list passed 60%.

78.                Volyn district.  February 5. In the second electoral precinct of the Pinovichi village council, after the list recommended by the CNS was announced, a group of middle peasants shouted: ʺWe do not need the list, we know your lists, we will nominate a candidate ourselves.ʺ As a result, the KNS list was disrupted. Four middle peasants got into the village council, of which one was a former member of Sokolovskyʹs gang.

79.                Nikolaev district.  February 5. In the Kolomaksky district, during the re‐elections of the Novo‐Ivanovsky village council, up to 40 middle peasants spoke out against the list put forward by the cell of the CPSU (b). One of those who opposed the list of middle peasants said: ʺThe peasants have nothing, there are no privileges, workers from 20 are elected, and we want to impose from 100 on us.ʺ

80.                Barnaul district.  February 20th. (Siberia). Chistunsky district. Middle peasants with. Zimino at the elections to the village council opposed the candidacies of communists and the poor: ʺWe need to try to keep the poor people out of the village council, otherwise they will torture us in the spring with their measurements of crops.ʺ

4. A bloc of middle peasants with well‐to‐do and kulaks

81.                Volyn district.  February 5th. (Ukraine). In with. Dashenki at the time of the re‐election, a group of middle peasants and kulaks was grouped under the leadership of the middle peasant and the forest stealer, who managed to organize around themselves the entire middle peasant part of the village. Of the two nominated counters, one was a protege of the group, the son of the church head. When the list was announced, this group added 19 candidates, among which, by the way, were members of the CND, apparently with the aim of endearing the poor. As a result of voting, 4 out of 7 members of the village council included 4 middle peasants, and only 2 members of the KNS. The inspirer of this group was the leader of the evangelists, who dealt with the issue of re‐election at a closed meeting of evangelists. The whole sect with. Dashenki attended the re‐election with her wives.

82.                Uman District.  February 15. In with. The Kocherzhinsky of the Uman district, middle peasants, preparing for the re‐elections of the village council, are blocking with the wealthy and kulaks, planning to jointly hold their candidates in order to take away from the poor peasants the land previously alienated as surplus after the re‐elections.

83.                Kherson district.  February 15. In with. Krymka, Snegirevsky district, prosperous and middle peasants jointly nominate their candidates for the village council, aiming at re‐elections to fail the candidacy of the current Presidential Council, which, in their opinion, protects only the interests of the poor, demanding that the wealthy and middle peasants pay taxes, describing property, etc. Poor people, in turn, insists on the appointment of the current chairman to the village council.

84.                Armavir district.  25 February. (North Caucasus). In with. Uspensky, in four polling stations, during the re‐elections, the middle peasants spoke in a bloc with the wealthy, who indicated with signs who they should vote for. As a result of the joint action of the middle peasants with the well‐to‐do, many well‐to‐do people entered the village council, some of them are clearly anti‐Soviet.

85.                Sverdlovsk District.  1st of February. (Ural). Beloyarsk district. During the re‐election of M. Brusyansky village council, the middle peasants, together with the wealthy, opposed the recommendatory list of candidates to the village council, declaring, ʺthere is only one poor peasant on the list, but we, the middle peasants and the wealthy, were let through.ʺ

86.                Trinity District.  1st of February. Poltava region. In the village Poltava at the re‐election meeting, the prosperous and middle peasants went in a bloc against the candidates of the poor: “Communists deprive the best people of the right to vote, but elect themselves. They opened a wide road to the Soviets for farm laborers and civil servants, and even for garbage in the form of delegates, while the middle peasant has no road and no one protects him. ʺ

87.                Chelyabinsk District.  1st of February. In the village The Ust‐Uisk joint speech of the middle peasants and the well‐to‐do at the re‐election meeting of the village council selected the list of candidates put forward by the poor: “We do not need your lists. If the Communists need to send themselves to the Council, then why should we be convened, well, since we have gathered, so we will choose who we need. The communists are you, and we are the peasants, the peasant party and are able to choose our own without all your lists. ʺ

V. Opposition of the kulaks at the elections

1. Methods of struggle of the kulaks in the elections

88.                Novgorod province.  February 15. (Northwest). Borovichsky u. At the re‐election meeting of the Karmanovsky district, Pereluchskaya vol. at the insistence of the wealthy, a break was taken, which lasted 1 1/2 hours, during which the wealthy agreed to act in a united front, speaking in defense of their candidates. As a result of the vote, the candidacies of the poor were turned down, and the former SocialistRevolutionary was elected to the village council and to the regional congress.

89.                Smolensk province.  February 22. (West). Velsky u. The chairman of the Prokshinsky village council, a kulak, before the start of the reelection, persuaded the poor to make him chairman of the village council, for which he promised to buy them a thresher. As a result of these promises, in two electoral districts, resolutions were passed on the need to hold a kulak in the pre‐village council and he was elected to the new village council, however, at an organizational meeting of the new composition, his candidacy for the chair of the village council was failed.

90.                Dorogobuzhsky district at the re‐election meeting in the village. Vedosakh Safonovskaya Vol. the well‐to‐do, under the leadership of the miller‐kulak, even before the elections campaigned against the candidacies of the communists, in particular, against the former pre‐village council: ʺCommunists should not be admitted to the village council, because they follow the line of the party and the Soviet government and care little about the peasants, it is better to choose nonparty people.ʺ During the elections, a well‐to‐do man spoke out, declaring: ʺWe need to get our guys from our village into the village council, and not allow strangers.ʺ As a result of these speeches, the candidates nominated by the cell were thwarted and elected to the village council: one well‐to‐do, one middle peasant, one poor peasant.

91.                Kharkiv district. February 15. (Ukraine). In the hut. Likhovo Lyubotinsky district kulak agitates: “Where is the promised democracy to the working people. All these are empty words with which the Bolsheviks feed us, they deliberately split us into kulaks, middle peasants and poor peasants and set us against each other. Those who can speak boldly are deprived of the right to vote, and those who are not deprived cannot speak, candidates cannot be widely discussed, everything is prepared in advance by the communists, and it cannot be otherwise. After all, the party is growing at the expense of people who do not want to work. They need to be fed and, therefore, they are imposed everywhere and everywhere, so that they live at the expense of the peasant, the peasants need to unite more closely and choose such people who would be themselves peasants and would protect them. There is not a single peasant in the central government, so what can be expected after that. No need to go to the meeting let them choose and listen to the reports. If we do not go to the elections, then this will only tighten the nose of the communists. ʺ

92.                Belotserkovsky district.  February 15. In with. Shaliyevka, Svirsky district, the re‐election was thwarted by a fist who arranged a wedding on the day of the re‐election. In with. Trushki re‐elections were thwarted in the same way. Kulaks deliberately timed five weddings on the day of the re‐election.

93.                Zhytomyr district.  February 15. In the village. Korotishche Volodarsky district in the house of one of the kulaks, a meeting of the kulaks was held, where the question of the upcoming re‐elections was discussed. At the meeting it was decided to give 5‐10 poods. bread to the poor in order to ʺshut their mouthsʺ and win over to their side. All members of the KNS of this village are under the influence of the kulaks, and the active non‐splinters do not show themselves in any way.

94.                Kuban District.  February 15. (North Caucasus). In stts. NovoMalorossiysk, on the eve of the re‐election, a well‐to‐do Cossack, soldering a few poor people, agitated: “Do not go to the re‐election, otherwise ours will come soon and you will feel bad. In Krasnodar and Tikhoretsk, workers also do not go to re‐elections. A Cossack came from Tsaritsyn and said that they are already mobilizing carts and horses, our volunteers are working abroad and are successfully fighting China ¹⁵⁰ and will soon come to us. ʺ

95.                Zlatoust district.  1st of February. (Ural). Miass district. During the re‐election of the village council, the kulaks opposed the candidacies of the communists: ʺThe communists seized power into their own hands, they do what they want, take a lot of tax, describe the last property ‐ why should we vote for them.ʺ

96.                Irbit District.  1st of February. Suburban area. During the re‐election of the Imakovsky village council, the kulaks declared: ʺThe communists now have no place in the Soviets, they must be replaced by business peasants.ʺ

97.                Slavgorodsky District.  The 25th of January. In with. Dancing in the Znamensk District, prosperous peasants, having identified their candidates for the village council in order to enlist the votes of the poor in the re‐election, promised the latter, if the re‐election was successful, to build a house. Having received the consent of the poor, the wealthy began to contribute 10‐15 rubles for the construction of a house, but when the list they had put forward was allotted by the electoral committee, since it included persons deprived of voting rights, the wealthy refused to build the promised house.

98.                Krasnoyarsk         District.  February            10. In     the          village. Osharova, Daurskiy district, three well‐to‐do people, having nominated their candidate to the village council, spent 18 quarters of moonshine on soldering voters.

99.                Amur District.  (DCK). In with. Yerkovtsy of Ivanovo district, who opposed the list of candidates put forward by the cell of the All‐Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks, declared at the re‐election: “We do not need such a list, this is all secretly done, we need to go against the meetings that are secretly organized by the poor, as they split the entire population; somewhere they prepared a list in the underground and they are presented to us; Down with him, we will not vote for him, but we ourselves must put forward our own list. ʺ

Vi. Kulak groups

100.  Moscow province.  February 19. (Centre). Egoryevsky u. In the Ilyinsky parish. in the village. Ustnovo, several persons deprived of voting rights came to the re‐election meeting, who did not obey the demand of the electoral commission to leave the meeting and raised a fuss, as a result of which the meeting was disrupted. After that, the chairman of the village council, under the influence of the ʺdisenfranchisedʺ, personally called a meeting, which was attended by all the ʺdisenfranchisedʺ and was also chaired by the

ʺdisenfranchisedʺ. At the meeting, the issue of the line of conduct in the future was discussed and it was decided to apply to the election commission for the restoration of the ʺdisenfranchisedʺ in rights.

101.4 February. At the exit ¹⁵¹ in Vasilievskaya parish. Klinsky u. a group of well‐to‐do and middle peasants actively acted, making it their goal to disrupt the list put forward by the cell. As a result, not a single party member entered the VIC. The wealthy, nominated by the group, was elected the chairman of the VIC.

102.             Bronnitsky In Chaplyzhenskaya parish. Before the Vol congress, a group of teachers was created, organizing secret meetings with the aim of ruining the cellʹs candidacy at the congress and holding their candidacy as the chairman of the VIC. At an election meeting, under the influence of campaigning by members of the group, two candidates nominated by the cell were ruined, including a member of the AllUnion Communist Party Nazarov, who was nominated for the position of chairman of the VIC. Five middle peasants (of whom one is a member of the CPSU) and the old chairman of the VIC, who was under the influence of the kulaks, entered the VIC.

103.             Oryol province.  February 19. In the Ottoman region of the Kruglyanskaya parish. Dmitrovsky u., In connection with the reelections, a group of wealthy and kulaks, headed by the former secretary of the village council (evangelist) and the psalmist, who was deprived of election rights, arose. The group is campaigning among the population for the election to the Council of the candidates designated by the group. At the same time, members of the group tried to disrupt the pre‐election meeting of the poor. The group holds secret meetings and tries to contact the neighboring village of Fedorovsky to establish the unity of action of the kulaks. The group does not enjoy authority among the poor and middle peasants.

104.1 February. In with. Drezgaevo Suvorov parish Before the reelection of the village council, on the initiative of the former Menshevik, who was exiled under the tsarist government for 10 years and was a volost commissar under Kerensky, a meeting of several wealthy and middle peasants was convened, at which a list of candidates for the Soviet was outlined. At an elective meeting, the group led the former warrant officer to the village council, and the initiator of the group, a kulak, and two well‐to‐do people at the volsezd. A well‐to‐do peasant, a member of the group, after the re‐election said: ʺWe have good discipline, we will be at the VIC elections as one.ʺ

105.             Cherepovets province.  1st of February. (Northwest). In the Stekhovsky iziruchastka Sovetskaya Vol. Ustyuzhensky u. at a preelection meeting, the kulak gathered around him the kulaks and the wealthy and, on behalf of his group, put forward a list of candidates for the Council. The poor, under pressure from the group, withdrew their candidacies.

106.             At the polling station Nyagoslav Yaganovskaya par. Cherepovetsky a grouping of anti‐Soviet elements was formed, headed by a former member of the CPSU (b) and a SocialistRevolutionary. At the pre‐election meeting, the members of the group made harsh anti‐Soviet speeches: “The communists are in command of us, and we have no democracy; our rights are curtailed. The Communist Party program is wrong. The masses of the workers did not take any part in the October Revolution, and the coup was made by the peasantry, dressed in gray greatcoats, but they do not pay attention to the peasants and their demands are not fulfilled. The whole burden of the tax rests on the middle peasant, and the poor peasant‐idler is exempt from the tax. It is necessary to introduce a civil tax, to impose on every able‐bodied person and luxury goods. At the volost congress it is necessary to choose such persons who would protect the middle peasant. ʺ All the middle peasants and kulaks followed the group, thanks to which three leaders of the group were elected to the district congress and nominated as candidates for members of the village council. At the district congress, these persons were nominated as candidates for the presidium of the district village council. When the secretary of the wolkom of the CPSU (b) challenged them, one of the members of the group made the following statement: “Culture from above is being killed. The authorities love it when a man is silent, and when he speaks the truth, they pierce his tongue. ʺ However, their candidates for the presidium of the village council did not pass.

107.             Smolensk province.  February 22. (West). At the re‐election meeting in the village. Lobanove Suburban par. Demidovsky u. the kulak group, consisting of 9 people, was actively involved. The kulaks strove to incite antagonism between the poor and the middle peasants, which they did. Taking advantage of the weakening of the poor, the kulaks thwarted the candidacies of the poor and led their own candidates. In 1918, this group kept in touch with the Zhigalov gang.

108.             Don district.  February 15. (North Caucasus). In with. Port Caton is actively campaigning for a cross‐union group, which at one of the reporting meetings openly protested against the admission of Communists to the Soviets: “There are only communists on the list and we must reject these lists.” The group nominated one member of the group, a former teacher, as a member of the village council. The entire assembly of the group is strictly guarded by posts of their own people. Among the population, the group is campaigning: ʺIf we recruit enough people to the Council of Communists, they will take our farm, thatʹs why you need to choose the owners.ʺ The group, in order to obtain information about what is happening in the party cell, sends its members to eavesdrop under the windows of the house where the cell sites.

109.             Kuban district.  February 15. In stts. Medvedovskaya has a group of 13 people, of which 4 are former chieftains, the rest are former officers, leading an intensified agitation about not admitting Communists and nonresidents to the Council. Members of the group are conducting underground work among the Cossacks aimed at the failure of the campaign. There were cases when the members of the group broke up the pasted‐up posters: “Down with class enmity between nonresidents and Cossacks”. The group is nominating a former judge under the tsarist regime for the post of chairman of the station.

110.             Stalingrad province.  February 20th. (Volga region). A group of kulaks on the farm Yaryshevsky st. Durnovskaya Khopersky district at the election meeting, taking advantage of the insignificant turnout of the poor, failed the list of candidates for the Council, nominated by the poor together with the party cell, and carried out her own list. On the eve of the election of the chairman of the village council, the kulaks arranged a drinking bout at the plenum of the village council, thanks to which they managed to get their protégé, a kulak, into the chair of the village council.

111.             Tagil district.  February 10. (Ural). In with. Shipetskiy of the Makhnevsky District, on the eve of the re‐election, a kulak group was organized, striving in every way to disrupt the pre‐election and election campaign. On election day, the bell‐ringer, drunk with his fist, began to sound the alarm, and the poor people, drunk with their fists, ran around the house where the re‐elections were taking place, shouting ʺfireʺ. However, the kulaks failed to disrupt the elections and the reelections took place only instead of 9:00. in the morning at 12 noon.

112.             Vladivostok district.  1st of February. (DCK). In with. Rakovka Suifun district, a group of wealthy and middle peasants called ʺUkraineʺ was formed. The group, led by the chairman of the village council, outlined a list of candidates for the village council, which included the most prosperous peasants in the village. The list was sent to REC for approval, but the latter returned the list back.

113.1 March. In with. Mikhailovka of the same area, a grouping of wealthy and kulaks arose under the leadership of the chairman of the RIK. The group held illegal meetings. Eleven meetings were held in the home of one group member during the month. At the meetings, the chairman of the RIK campaigned for the failure of the communists and all those sympathizing with the Soviet regime. The grouping outlined a list of candidates for the Council under the name ʺPlowmanʺ. The grouping was associated with a number of other villages, for example, with. Novo‐Nastkov and Voznesensky. Members of the group campaigned among the poor, saying that ʺif the communists get to the village council, they will take off the last shirt from the poor.ʺ Among the wealthy, they were campaigning for 100% turnout in the elections in order to hold the Plowman list. Well‐to‐do in the elections having occupied almost all the seats (the premises of all the voters could not accommodate and a large number remained in the corridor and in the courtyard), we held a meeting of two members of the group at the presidium. At the meeting, shouts were heard: ʺDown with the Communists, we donʹt need Jews, they will take off our last shirt.ʺ The well‐to‐do did not allow the member of the Dalkrai Executive Committee to speak at the meeting. Three lists were put up at the meeting: one from the joint meeting of the poor and women, the second from the number of the same, but with the addition of the wealthy, and the third from the Plowman group. The second list was put up in order to beat the voices of the wealthy, but the wealthy managed to hold the Plowman list by a majority vote. The well‐to‐do women who tried to leave the meeting before the vote on the Plowmanʹs list were standing in the doorway and returned.

Secretary of INFO OGPU Kucherov

APPENDIX No. 4

ELECTION DEMANDS OF PEASANTS  

I. Orders, additions to them and characteristic speeches

a) On the question of ʺscissorsʺ

1.                   Voronezh province.  12th of February. In Ostrogozhsky, in the second hut, sl. Taking a break when reading the order, the poor man made the following addition: “To instruct the new composition of the village council to petition the higher authorities to increase the working day of the workers to 12:00, since the peasants work 16‐18 hours. per dayʺ.

2.                   Tambov province.  February 10. Kirsanovsky u. In with. Korovino Kurdyukovskaya Vol. according to the report of a member of the VIC (member of the Komsomol) ʺAgriculture and Industryʺ, in contrast to the proposed resolution of the speaker ʺto recognize the industry as fruitful and correctʺ, the middle peasants introduced their resolution: ʺ correct regulation of agricultural products with factory products. ʺ

3.                   Oryol province.  February 29. In the village. Kharlamovka, the poor man who spoke at the meeting of the poor made a proposal that ʺthe village council should petition the higher authorities to reduce the prices of urban goods, because the poor have nothing to buy at a high price, and the poor must take care of the poor.ʺ

4.                   Ivanovo‐Voznesenskaya province.  February 16. Yuriev‐Polsky u. In with. Natalikh, at the re‐election meeting, the peasants introduced and adopted an addendum to the order: ʺReduce retail prices for manufactured goods, reduce rates for workers and employees, establish a uniform taxation, allocate large funds for tax rebates from the poor.ʺ

5.                   Tambov province.  February 10. Peskovskaya Vol. According to the report of the RIK in the 2nd Peskovsky village council, a mandate was introduced: ʺTo achieve a reduction in prices for manufactured goods, strictly carry out a saving regime, reducing the rates to the responsible employees of the VIKs, PECs and RIKs, cutting travel expenses to a minimum.ʺ

6.February 20. Gryazinskaya Vol. According to the report of the Kazinsky Village Council, a resolution was unanimously adopted, proposed by a member of the VIC: ʺFor our part, we express gratitude to the Soviet government and ask the higher authorities to pay full attention to the discrepancy in prices between peasant and industrial goods, since agriculture cannot get stronger from this at the moment.ʺ

7.                   Leningrad             province.  25         February. (Northwest). In             speeches              on accounting reports and in debates at election meetings, among other demands, resolutions were passed: ʺTo continue the struggle to reduce prices by reducing overhead costs and improving the trading apparatus.ʺ

8.                   North Caucasus.  February 15. In one of the points of the order with. Dubovsky says: “To petition for the improvement of the peasant life, such as: to equalize the prices of manufactured goods, basic necessities with the prices of peasant production at the pre‐war ruble exchange rate. If this cannot be done, then so that the peasant goods, thrown into the markets, go directly to where there is a demand for them, minus the import payment, and if this is not possible, then the peasant should be given an 8‐hour working day, and the product of overtime work must act in favor of the peasants. ʺ

b) About tax

9.                   Moscow province.  February 16. (Centre). Podolsky in with. Dosupovo Schebantsevskaya    parish, with. Lapashkino         Dobromensky    vol., Der. Kalinovka Sukhanov parish additions were made to the mandate: lower taxes, lower prices for manufactured goods and improve their quality, and eliminate youth unemployment.

10.                Nizhny Novgorod              province.  Lukoyanovskiy               u. In       the village. Nadezhka at a re‐election meeting when discussing the order of the provincial committee

the present kulak made an addition to the order, supported by the majority of those present: to reduce the agricultural tax for all peasants, without exception, without dividing them into poor peasants, middle peasants and kulaks. Build local bridges at the expense of the state budget, as well as equip fire transports at the expense of the latter. The forest should be released free of charge since the tax is taken from the peasants.

11.                Yaroslavl province.  February 5th. Frolovsky district. At the reelection meeting in Mishkinsky parish. peasant with. Frolovskoye, a proposal was made: to narrow the rights of the VIC on the issue of taxes and levy tax only for the local budget, to support the Red Army without prejudice to the peasants. Increase the price of flax to avoid a reduction in the cultivated area. All these proposals, with the exception of the last one, were rejected by the meeting.

12.                Vladimirskaya lips.  February 15. Alexandrovsky u. and parish. Speakers on the reporting report of the VIK and the village council in the village. Samarino dwelled mainly on the question of the severity of the agricultural tax in the current year. An addition was made to the resolution on the VICʹs report by those present: to consider it correct to levy agricultural tax only on arable land, which, when calculating the tax, should be divided into categories depending on the yield.

13.                Kaluga province.  February 27. Poor peasants village. Bely Top Perestryazhskaya Vol. According to the VIC report, they said: ʺFor late delivery of agricultural tax, penalties are levied illegally only from the poor, since the wealthy have the means and pay the tax on time, and the poor have to pay 2‐3 times more tax than they owe.ʺ

14.                Voronezh province.  12th of February. Rossoshansky district at the re‐election of the Krinichansk village council of N.‐Kalitvyanskaya vol. a poor peasant proposed ʺto reduce the number of state employees and by reducing the state budget, and thereby lower the agricultural tax.ʺ

15.                Pskov province.  February 23. (Northwest). Nevelsky u. At the reelection meeting in the village. Nikonikha Ust‐Dolyssky parish. a wellto‐do peasant declared: “A peasant cannot live, since he is strangled by a tax. The tax is taken from us incorrectly, it is necessary that the tax should be taken not from the profitability, but from the amount of available land. ʺ

16.                Smolensk province.  February 22. (West). Dorogobuzhsky u. At an elective meeting in the village. Marshal of the Safonovskaya parish the middle peasant said: “The Soviet government is doing everything well, only one thing is bad ‐ it charges agricultural tax incorrectly. When levying a tax, it is not necessary to take into account eaters, the category of land, but it is necessary to ensure that the tax is according to the prewar time, i.e., from the amount of land, and so that everyone pays and there should be no exemptions, except for natural disasters. ʺ

17.                Ural.  February 15. Basically, on the issue of tax in 28 settlements of the Urals, typical proposals are as follows: “Pay attention to the work on agricultural tax up to the revision of the tax collection structure. Timely take into account the correct implementation of the tax policy. ʺ

c) About land management

18.                Voronezh province.  12th of February. (Centre). Rossoshansky district at the re‐election meeting of the Sagunovsky village council, Podgorenskaya vol. the middle peasant spoke: “Why are those who are deprived of electoral rights not deprived of their right to land? They trade, receive allotments, and do not have any public duties. They are members of the land society, and we serve various duties for them. ʺ

19.                Bobrovsky u. At the pre‐election meeting in the village. Sofenke Anninskaya parish the middle peasant spoke: ʺThe slogan is for the people all the land, but in reality for the state farm, and the Soviet government is trading it.ʺ When discussing the mandate from the voters, the addition was made ʺto take land from state farms, transfer it to the peasants.ʺ

20.                Kaluga lips. Meschovsky. At the re‐election meeting of the Sukholomsky District Village Council of Shelkovskaya Vol. the kulak and the middle peasant on behalf of the electoral commission proposed an extensive mandate. After the general part, in which the author of the order, trying to express his loyalty and adhere only to the criticism of the local Council, stresses that they ʺhave no revitalization of the Soviets, there is no promotion of village activists and there is no revolutionary legalityʺ, and also that ʺthe deliberate search for a fist in each the village retains a danger in the sense that experienced people can go too far and in some places rank peasants in the category of kulaks, who, by all indications, must be classified as middle peasants, as in the organization of the poor, among which not the poor, but idlers may fall. ʺ In the further part of the order, the following questions are examined in detail: what should the Council do to interest the peasantry in socialism, what the Council should know about the kulak and the poor, about cooperation, what should the Council do with regard to the supply of agricultural loans, KKOV in the implementation of land laws in the field of agricultural tax, what should the Council take to promote the law on forestry, in the field of state insurance, in political and educational work. The following points are characteristic of the corresponding sections of the order: “The Soviets systematically turn the middle peasant into a kulak, and a bummer into a poor peasant. State farms, state funds and other income items of the state, which often remained from former landownersʹ nests and were located within the boundaries of peasant settled life, have an unpleasant effect on the peasantry, even murderous. These income items of the state suggest to the peasant that the latter could have won everything from the landowner, not everything from the state, and therefore it is necessary to cancel the above and hand it over to the peasantry. ʺ

d) On reducing the salary of employees

21.                Voronezh province.  March 3rd. (Centre). Novokhopersky u. At the re‐election meeting in the village. Berezovka Vorobyovskoy Vol. an addition was made to the order: “Reduce the salary of doctors and teachers in favor of the rural post office, since teachers receive a salary, but work only 6 months a year, and reduce the salary of responsible workers who receive wages from 75 rubles. a month or more. ʺ

22.                Pskov province.  February 23. (Northwest). At the pre‐election meeting in the village. Hooks of Volodarskaya Vol. the secretary of the village council and other speakers pointed out the need to satisfy all members of the village council with salaries by cutting the wages of the district workers: “Sections of the village council will not work for free; organizations developed red tape and obesity. District workers ride cabbies, and we beat sandals for nothing in the mud. ʺ Such speeches were supported by those present.

e) On the relationship between the working class and the peasantry

23.                Moscow province.  24 February. (Centre). Moscow u. In Proletarskaya Vol. at the congress on the report of the PEC, middle peasants spoke: “Enough privileges for the workers, give way to the peasant. Look, do not drive the peasant to the extreme, otherwise a formidable cloud may approach. We need to create our own control commissions from the peasants, otherwise they take money from our pockets, but they donʹt give us anything. Give way to the peasant in the Soviet, otherwise the workers have a better organization, so there are more of them at the congress. ʺ

24.                Ivanovo‐Voznesenskaya province.  February 10. In the village. Zimenki Kineshemskaya par. Kineshemsky u. the meeting adopted a clause of the order of the following content: ʺIn view of the fact that during the 10 years of the existence of Soviet power, the political consciousness of the peasantry has increased significantly, to raise the question before the relevant organizations about equalizing the electoral rights of the peasant population with the workers and the urban population.ʺ

25.                Pskov province.  February 23. (Northwest). At the re‐election meeting of the Mountain Village Council, Bezhanitskaya Vol. Novotorzhsky u. the well‐to‐do who spoke said: “The Soviet government pays attention only to the workers, not to the peasants. We must strive to make the peasants equal with the workers ‐ otherwise it is impossible to live. The worker receives up to 200 rubles. salaries a month, but everyone is fighting off the peasant. ʺ

26.                Komi‐Zyryansk region.  March 1. Ust‐Kulomskaya vol. At the reelection meeting, a demobilized Red Army soldier who spoke out said: “Power currently belongs to the workers and peasants, as the communists say, but in reality, if you look at it, it turns out that power belongs only to workers and employees. It is necessary to carry out a second purely peasant revolution. ʺ

27.                Samara province.  February 10. (Volga region). Melekessky at the reporting meeting of the village council in the village. Voskresenka Elanovskaya parish the wealthy spoke out: “During the existence of the Soviet regime, we were told that the tsarist government oppressed us, we agreed with this, but in the end the Soviet government squeezed us into a fist, hiding behind the screen of “the power of workers and peasants”. Power is like workers and peasants, but in reality it has sons and stepsons. Sons are workers, and we are stepchildren, the authorities have focused all their attention on the workers, everything to them, nothing to us, it has become completely impossible for us to live. We have been listening to you for 9 years, but now we no longer have to listen to you, because the authorities are not at all interested in the peasantry. ʺ

28.                Perm District.  (Ural). According to the reporting report of the Frolovsky village council of the Motovilikhinsky district, the order proposed by the former teacher was unanimously adopted, as follows: “Elected deputies are obliged to implement the principle of unconditional equality in governing the country between the proletarian and peasant classes. There should not be a dictatorship of the proletarian class in relation to the peasantry, but there should be an alliance of workers and peasants, they, as allies, should be on an equal footing. In all the little things of life, the peasant class must have the same advantages that the proletarian class has won for itself. The peasants should be given the same rights as workersʹ unions have. The tax burden on government spending should be borne in the same way by the proletarian and peasant classes. ʺ

29.10 February. At the Ilyinsky District Congress, the following appeal was circulated among the delegates ʺfor the memory of the Congress of Soviets.ʺ

“Comrades peasants! You are our deputies. You are the chosen ones of the will of the people. You are the complete masters to decide the questions before you for the interests of the working peasantry. If this is so, then you must pay the utmost attention to everything, especially to the re‐election of the district executive committee of the Council of Peasant Deputies. If we have a peasant locality, therefore it is necessary to choose and preferably party, but necessarily local peasants of the Ilyinsky region, there are a lot of them at the congress, the conscious mass of the entire working peasantry asks you for this. Do not forget that the worker knows more about his industry, let him be where he is needed, and especially Borobkov ‐ this is absolutely not our regiment, he absolutely does not know the needs of the peasantry, and besides, he is also a former psalmist ‐ well, why us it, choose yours. With a deep request to you, comrade deputies, your peasants. ʺ

f) Other characteristic performances

30.                Cherepovets province.  February 23. (Northwest). Cherepovetsky At the re‐election meeting of the Glinsky village council Gorskaya vol. after the speech of the middle peasant, who said: “We are electing members of the village council, they need to be instructed to tell them above that it’s no secret to anyone that bureaucracy in our higher institutions is still firmly in place and needs to be eliminated,” a mandate was issued to the new composition of the village council: “ To re‐elect the old composition of the village council, as bureaucratic, and not meeting its purpose due to a shortfall in agricultural tax; the new composition of the village council to pay serious attention to the identification of objects of taxation, to streamline the case with benefits and to apply for a reduction in prices. ʺ

31.                Samara province.  February 20th. (Volga region). Samara district in with. Repyevka the wealthy at the reporting meeting made a proposal ʺto abolish the stateʹs monopoly on foreign trade and to allow the unhindered import of machines, goods, etc. from abroad, since everything is cheap there.ʺ

II. Orders Requiring the Organization of Cross Unions

32.                Kaluga province.  March 1. (Centre). At the re‐election meeting in the Sukholomsky district in Shchelkanovskaya vol. Meschovsky u. on behalf of the electoral commission (which includes the kulak and the well‐to‐do), the meeting was [offered] the following addition to the mandate: “Why are the peasants hostile to the workers, they are hostile to the workers because the workers live in good conditions. They have been provided with good apartments, they work only 8 hours a day, have their own insurance, go to resorts and rest houses. They have their own union, which protects their interests, while the peasants are not allowed to form their own unions. ʺ The order, together with the addition by the assembly, was approved and adopted in full.

33.                Amur District.  March 1. (DCK). At the 2nd Aleksandrovsky District Congress, delegates from the village. Fills of the Boryspil Village Council and the Klyuchevsky Village Council, instructions were proposed, in which, among other requirements, there were requirements for the organization of a peasant union. Of greatest interest is the mandate proposed by the delegates of the village. Fills.

“We, citizens of the village. Fillings of the Alexandrovsky district, we give our delegate to the 2nd Alexandrovsky District Congress of Soviets the following [mandate]:

1)                   Having discussed the issue at the general meeting on compulsory insurance of crops, which is supposed to be introduced in 1927 and subsequent ones, it was decided to ask the district congress to pass resolutions on it to abolish compulsory insurance of crops and animals. Insurance must be voluntary, otherwise it will be harmful to agriculture and be a burden on the peasantry.

Help from Gosstrakh ^{152 is} not great and hailstorms are a rare case.

2)                   Discuss the issue of agricultural tax and pass a resolution on changing the agricultural tax, namely:

a)  divide the income in the peasant economy not into eaters, but into workers, counting workers, employees and women from 16 to 65 years old and, if the income is 40 rubles. 430 rubles per worker per month or per year, exempt from paying tax, as well as workers and employees. Note: this does not apply to those farms that use hired labor, they pay tax on all income;

b) abolish rates, not take a certain percentage from the ruble 03‐05 kopecks. or 10 kopecks. from a ruble, no more;

c)  to establish the possibility of passing the tax at the village councils;

d) to abolish the payment of this or that interest on time, to set one payment deadline from October 1 to March 1, after March 1 to charge a penalty.

3)                   Discuss, i.e., raise the issue at the district congress of Soviets about remuneration for peasant labor in the same way as workers and employees are paid, that is, pay (pay) for peasant grain products so that at least 16 kopecks per hour work. per hour of work. Approximately: calculate how many human hours of work the processing (sowing, harvesting, threshing and transportation) of one tithe of virgin land or fallow land requires and how much grain this or that tithe gives, and how much a pound will cost, for example: a tithe of wheat required 800 hours and gave 50 pounds., per hour for 16 kopecks. RUB 128 for work and plus the expense of 25 rubles, equal to 153 rubles. divided by 50 ‐ equal to 3 rubles. 06 kopecks pood. This will be equal to the wages of a worker receiving 35‐38 rubles. a month of salary.

4)                   Abolish the queues for the delivery of grain at grain‐receiving points and in all offices for receiving money and for the delivery of tax, etc., where [no matter] where they arise.

5)                   Discuss the issue of logging for the peasantʹs own needs. To change the existing provision on logging, because such a provision on logging ‐ loggers cannot fulfill it without violating it, that the conditions are very difficult, violating it, loggers are fined and punished in an administrative order, and this aggravates relations with the Soviet government. Therefore, to establish a more preferential and free order of logging:

a) the logger must take a ticket after harvesting, i.e., after logging for the material and for the amount that will be harvested, both drill and wood;

6) the place of harvesting does not indicate rivers and dachas, but a free choice for loggers.

b) We also ask the district congress to establish the most decisive measures to combat hooliganism. For hooliganism, take the most severe and cruel punishment and not mitigate his guilt. It makes no difference whether he is poor or well‐to‐do, in general whoever he is: party or non‐party, and not to release early hooligans and criminals in general from prison. In the past years, in this respect, the peopleʹs court judged for hooliganism too weakly, which responded to the village councils. The weak and inactive work of the latter, in order to avoid such abnormalities in the future, it is necessary to make a binding resolution on this issue.

7) To improve the situation of the peasantry and to ensure the incredibly hard peasant labor, raise the question of organizing a peasant union for discussion and instruct delegates to the district congress of Soviets and, through the district congress of Soviets, discuss [the question of] the peasant union at the All‐Russian Congress of Soviets in order to the latter decided to organize peasant unions. The latter are united in the All‐Russian All‐Union Peasant Union. The latter merges with the All‐Russian Trade Union (Central Committee of the Union of Right Forces) ‐ in case it will be impossible to combine the peasant union with the trade union of workers and employees, and so on. To grant the peasant union the right to trade in peasant agricultural products (on a cooperative basis) on the basis of cooperation rights with the right to export and import, i.e.

Long live equality, the workers ʹand peasantsʹ union, not in words, but in deeds.

Long live the working people ‐ workers and peasants.

Long live the workers ʹand peasantsʹ government.

Long live the Aleksandrovsky District Congress of Soviets.

We wish the 2nd Alexander Congress of Soviets fruitful work in improving the workers ʹand peasantsʹ situation. ʺ

III. Performances for peasant unions

34.  Moscow province.  25 February. (Centre). In the village. Obukhovo Sukovskaya Vol. Kolomensky u. At the meeting, the middle peasant made a proposal: “To ask the government to authorize the organization of peasant unions. The peasants are pulled, robbed and not protected. The workers live on the peasantʹs neck. We need to demand a peasant union to defend our interests. ʺ The speech did not meet with support.

35.1 March. In the village. Moskovkino Sudislovskaya Vol. at the elections, the middle peasant said: “We do not need to accept the mandate. These are the Bolsheviks just chatting. They wonʹt do anything anyway. The Party completely crushed the peasantry, squeezing the last juice out of us. We no longer need to endure, but to take action against the party. Letʹs organize a peasant union, but we donʹt need to let the communists into the union. ʺ

36.19 February. In the village. Nikiforov, Kurovsky vol. Serpukhovsky u. During the re‐election campaign for the cross union, a well‐to‐do man (former policeman) agitated: “Everything is in the hands of the Jews, there are no pure‐blooded Russians in power, the Jews rallied and oppress us, and the Russian communists sold out to them. The only way out of this bondage is the organization of the peasant masses into an alliance, which must make a coup and take power into its own hands. With the existence of a peasant union, we will be able to defend our rights, and the purpose of the union will be to convene a Constituent Assembly. ʺ

37.                Oryol province. 1st of February. In the Ottoman region of the Kruglyanskaya parish. Dmitrovsky u. During the re‐elections, there were sharp protests for organizing a cross union on the part of a former Red Army man, a middle peasant: “The peasantry in our country is the majority, but it lives 1000 times worse than the working class. Since there are more peasants, therefore, most of the October gains belong to the peasants; without the peasants, the working class would not have made a revolution, and therefore the dictatorship must be peasant. We need a peasant union, with the help of which we could regulate the economy of our country, and now no one is protecting us. If the AllRussian Central Executive Committee, along with the Council of Nationalities and the Allied Council, were a peasant union, then things would be settled in our favor. We would like to give land to the state and work on it for 8 hours., and for this, let the state pay us wages as workers. Our brother is being driven to Siberia for resettlement, and the Jews to the Crimea. ʺ The speech was supported by the majority of those present at the elections. There is an assumption that this speech is the result of the activities of the former Socialist‐Revolutionary, who held a major post in Kiev under the Provisional Government.

38.                Ivanovo‐Voznesenskaya province.  At a meeting of peasants der. Kobelikhi of the Rodnikovsky District, one peasant (the social situation has not been clarified) made the following statement: “Violence and unrest are going on everywhere. Why are only Soviet, communist newspapers allowed by the censorship, why are they not allowed to publish newspapers of other parties, why are they not allowed to freely organize the peasantry into their peasant organizations, and why other parties are not allowed to work and speak freely. Where there is freedom of speech, press, they control everything ‐ as it used to be, so it is now. ʺ

39.                Voronezh province.  12th of February. In the hut. Biryuchi of the Treasury Village Council Pogrom Vol. Valuisky u. there is a group of the well‐to‐do who, meeting with one of them, discusses the question of the cross unions. They conceive of the Cross Union as an organization that in every way contributes to the economic development of peasant farms. The group does not let anyone into its meetings, and so far it does not take this issue into the mass.

40.                In the village. N. Yablokovo Pogrom Vol. Valuisky u. at the meeting, a kulak spoke out on the question of the cross unions: “The peasant has a bad life because he is not organized. We need to organize in a union, as in America, in order to occupy the same position as the worker and negotiate prices. ʺ The poor man rebuked this kulak, declaring that ʺthis alliance will be useful only to the kulaks, and it will hit the poor in the face.ʺ The last performance was supported by all the poor.

41.                Vladimirskaya lips.  February 15. In the village. Poshatovo Drachevsky parish Muromsky u. at the meeting on the report of the VIK, there were sharp statements by the peasants, who believed that only the organization of a peasant union could improve the situation of the peasantry. The requirement to organize a QS is supported by the entire village. Last year, delegates from this village made a proposal to organize a cross union at the volost congress of Soviets. The same can be expected this year.

42.                In the village. Birches of Aleksandrovskaya parish and the district at a meeting on the issue of the RIK report, a well‐to‐do peasant made a demand for a peasant union that ʺwould enjoy all the rights of the workersʹ trade union.ʺ In addition, the speaker put forward the idea of creating a ʺland syndicateʺ, which, according to the speaker, was supposed to take over the entire land. The peasants, cultivating this land, would have to hand over all products to the syndicate and receive a salary. Neither proposal was met with sympathy among the peasants.

43.                Among the peasants with. Edemskoe of the same volost of Kovrovsky u. two workers f‐ki them. Sverdlov is campaigning for the creation of a cross union. ʺOnly in an organized manner, as workers, can you put before the government [the question] of protecting your interests,ʺ the speakers said. The initiative of agitation for the KS comes from the workers of the fur [new] department of the f‐ki them. Sverdlov of the former SRs, inciting workers to speak for the Constitutional Court.

44.                Tula province.  February 7. The teacher of the Shchuchin school of the Vasilievsky district (he is also the chairman of the cultural commission of the village council) organized a group consisting of a miller, a priest and two or three kulaks, with whom he talks about the peasant union, spreading these ideas among the peasants. As a result of the preliminary work of these ʺorganizersʺ at the open meeting of the cell, four speeches for the cross unions were noted.

45.                Nizhny Novgorod province.  12th of February. At a meeting in the village. Repairs Lukoyanovsky u. a local peasant spoke out (until 1906 he was a member of the ʺUnion of Michael the Archangelʺ) and said: ʺAs long as there are small owners, a peasant union is necessary.ʺ

46.                Leningrad province. February 23. (Northwest). At the parent meeting in the ShKM village. Ananino Koporsk parish Trotsky One peasant (the social situation has not been clarified) declared: ʺThe only way out for the peasantry from the difficult situation is the widespread creation of peasant unions that will end this dictatorship of the proletariat and give the peasant the opportunity to arrange a better life.ʺ The performance was met with sympathy.

47.                Arkhangelsk province.  February 15. In the village. Aferovo SredneVazhskaya Vol. agitation for the organization of peasant unions is being waged by a kulak, declaring that ʺonly by organizing peasant unions will the peasants be able to achieve the same rights as the workers enjoy.ʺ This kulak with the same kind of agitation acted back in 1924, for which he was arrested. He enjoys prestige among the population and is a member of the PO revkommiss.

48.                Crimea.  February 20th. In the village. Uzun‐Ayyak (Bulgarian) of the Kerch region, two wealthy peasants are systematically campaigning for the organization of a peasant union. They say: “The Soviet government pays little attention to the peasants and, taking advantage of their defenselessness, exploits them. The peasants need to unite in a union that would protect the interests of the peasants, just as trade unions protect the interests of workers and employees. The Soviet government, not allowing the organization of the peasant union, deliberately seeks to use the disorganization of the peasants. ʺ

The middle peasants and the well‐to‐do are under the influence of these ʺagitatorsʺ.

49.                Donetsk district.  February 3rd. (North Caucasus). In sl. Mankovo, Leono‐Kalitvensky district, at the meeting, the middle peasant who spoke said: “Employees are a well‐known group of people who live well and receive huge amounts of money, but in fact do nothing, by which they exploit the peasants. We donʹt need this element. The dictatorship of one working class should not be, and it should not be so, for under this dictatorship the peasant cannot be free. We peasants, in order to be free, need to organize ourselves into an alliance and thereby free ourselves from the oppression that is now being noticed. ʺ At the same meeting, a fist in his speech pointed out: ʺIn essence, the bond ¹⁵³ there is no town or country, but only dependence and skillful exploitation of the peasants by the workers. In fact, peasant economy should be superior to industry and, therefore, domination should not be over industry. ʺ In the same village, at a reporting meeting, the middle peasant, who was elected to the commission to draft a resolution, at a meeting of the commission proposed to include a clause on the creation of a peasant union in the resolution. This proposal was rejected by the commission.

50.                Salsky district.  February 8. In with. Vorontsovo‐Nikolaevsky Vorontsovo‐Nikolaevsky district, a prosperous peasant in a conversation said: ʺWhy does the government not allow peasants to organize their peasant union, if this union was organized, then it could be opposed to the party.ʺ

51.                Sretensky district.  February 7. (Siberia). In with. In N [ovo] Troitsk (Zhidkinskiy district), the prosperous, in contrast to the organization of the poor, created an illegal organization of the cross‐union, uniting part of the poor and middle peasants, working under the leadership of the wealthy. This union does not manifest itself in a real re‐election campaign, since the cell has a great influence in the countryside, and the groupʹs agitation is not successful.

Secretary of INFO OGPU Kucherov

APPENDIX No. 5

EASTERN NATIONAL REPUBLICS AND AUTONOMOUS AREAS

MIDDLE ASIA

Re‐election campaign

1.                   Kyrgyzstan. Karakol district. Long before the re‐election campaign, two groups emerged, led by manaps and former senior officials. One of the groups (Sukhanovʹs) had a number of meetings at the apartments of former district workers with the participation of large manats. The meetings discussed the seizure of the grassroots and district apparatus and the nomination of their candidates for the congress. In addition, electoral districts were distributed among the leaders of the group and special representatives were appointed. The second group (Mukambaevskaya), the center of which was Dzhetyoguzovskaya vol., Got in touch with other volosts and united around itself a number of scattered groups. Within three months, representatives were sent to the auls of the district, who contacted the manaps of the Turgen, Barskaun, Ullaholsk, Kungei‐Aksul and Kurmeni volosts.

However, at the re‐elections themselves, none of these groups had any success in view of their timely isolation and the organization of the poor.

2.                   The percentage of voter participation in re‐elections increased by 1215% compared to last year (37‐40% versus 25% in the past).

3.                   Frunzensky District.  One of the strongest groups (Khudaykulovʹs) had disintegrated by the time of the re‐elections. In Alamedin parish. at the time of the re‐election, the population was divided into two groups. One of the groups, led by prominent manaps, spent 350 rubles on bribing joint and party workers. money, wool from 50 rams, three horses, 46 rams and one cow. The second group, led by the chairman of the agricultural partnership, used cooperation, taking advantage of the populationʹs dependence on loans. Party cells, drawn entirely into the grouping struggle, resorted to the exclusion of persons adjoining the opposite side. As a result, elections were held by nominating delegates from each group.

4.                   Population of Kalinin parish. by the time of the re‐election, it was divided into two groups, one of which spent 700 rubles, and the other 150 in order to attract supporters. The grassroots co‐apparat and party cells were drawn into the grouping struggle.

5.                   Jalal‐Abad District.  In the mountains. Jalal‐Abad formed a group of local respondents who tried to stay in their places. The group expanded its work to a number of districts throughout the district.

6.                   By the time of the re‐election of the Soviets in the villages. Healy Miley Sai Vol. representatives of Uzbekistan arrived for the re‐election campaign, stating that the new zoning of villages. Healy passed to Uzbekistan. At the same time, an authorized representative of the JalalAbad Okrug Election Commission arrived. As a result of a dispute between representatives, the re‐election was disrupted. The population was left wondering whether to submit to Kyrgyzstan or Uzbekistan.

7.                   Turkmenistan. Poltoratsk district. Krasnovodsk region. In HasanKuli vol. the re‐election campaign was accompanied by a revival in the activities of individual clan groups fighting among themselves for the lower government. Among the dehkans there are supporters of building aul councils on the basis of genus. Particularly irreconcilable family members express their readiness to leave the territory of the village council, if members of a hostile group enter it.

8.                   Ginsburg district. In the village of Shakhtum‐Kala, in connection with the re‐election campaign, relations between the two clan groups have worsened. Each of the groups nominates its own candidates for the village council. A similar struggle between clan associations was noted in the villages of Taza‐Kala, Ginsburg region, Kizilja‐Kala and other Bezmeinsky region.

9.                   In the aul of Kindykly, Bezmeinsky district, two election groups have been formed, one is a bai group with the participation of the pre‐local council, the other is a poor one. Within the poor group, there are tensions between the Baloch ¹⁵⁴ and the Turkmens (on the basis of land use).

10.                Ginsburg district. In the village of Artyk, the prosperous and bai created a grouping in opposition to the poor, trying to seize the village council into their own hands. In the village of Mamed Oraz, at the preelection meeting, bais and wealthy people showed increased activity, using the support of the Pre‐Council.

11.                The pre‐election meeting of the Zou village of the Bakharden district was attended by 90 out of 825 voters. In the village of Kodzhi there were 30 voters out of 230, in the aul Ak‐Tepe from 1105‐132, in the village of Nakhur, out of 2,416 residents, 215 came to the meeting, in the village of Keshi, out of 1,000 residents, 100, etc.

Poltoratsk district. A smuggler‐trader entered the election commission of the Ak‐Tepe village of the Bakharden district.

12.                In the Ginsburg district, 1648 people out of 10,070 residents were present at the pre‐election meetings of 14 auls and villages. In the village of Yuz‐Bashi, out of 2,753 inhabitants, 184 turned up, in the village of Bachi, out of 2,289‐265, etc.

13.                Merv District. At the pre‐election meeting of the village of KichiAga, Serakhsky district, the pre‐RIK read a report prepared in advance in writing. The pre‐council was also unable to make a report and the secretary reported for him according to what was written. In both reports, no work deficiencies were indicated. No answer was given to a number of questions asked by voters.

14.                In the village of Chaach, Tejen district, 37 people out of 964 voters were present at the pre‐election meeting.

National relations

15.                Uzbekistan.  Samarkand District. Between the Russian workers and the Uzbeks of the mountains. A fight broke out over the refusal of one of the Uzbek workers to obey the orders of the administration and hand over a Russian‐type wheelbarrow to the Russian workers. As a result of the fight, 8 Uzbek workers were beaten.

16.                Tashkent district.  Mirza‐Chulsky district. Russian peasants of the village. Oktyabrskiy expressed strong dissatisfaction with the attitude of the Mirzachul militia (mostly Uzbeks) towards them, accusing them of rough treatment and disregard for the complaints of the

Russians. Discontent is intensified by the agitation of the kulaks and the well‐to‐do, publicly expressing impatience in anticipation of ʺthat convenient moment when they have to take up arms.ʺ

17.                Andijan district. About a hundred horse Kyrgyz, who arrived from Kyrgyzstan, attacked the Uzbek village of Batrak‐Abad, Izbaskent region. The attackers under the leadership of the former kurbash (leaders of the Basmach gangs) robbed all the property of the aul, and the resisting Uzbeks were beaten. A secondary attack by the Kirghiz is being prepared, in connection with which an alarm has been raised among the Uzbek population in the village of Batrak‐Abad and in neighboring auls. Long before the attack, the well‐to‐do Kyrgyz, deprived of the surplus land that had been transferred to the Uzbeks under the Zemreform, incited national antagonism, trying to disrupt the spring field work of the newly endowed Uzbeks. Before the spring campaign last year, the Kyrgyz Maili‐Sai vol. captured the livestock of the Uzbek population of the Izbaskent region. The aforementioned attack on the Uzbek aul is a direct continuation of the activities of the Kirghiz, deprived of land by the land reform.

18.                In the mountains. Kokand (old) between Russian workers engaged in public works to dismantle old buildings, and Uzbeks, spectators, a fight broke out with the participation of about 500 people. Despite the warning from the technical supervision about the possibility of a collapse and the prohibition of outsiders to be close to the work being performed, a group of Uzbeks, spectators, remained in place. The fight broke out between one of the Russian workers, posted for the guard, and the Uzbek, who called the worker a pederast. Russian workers and Uzbeks stood up for the fighting. The militiamen were beaten while trying to separate them, and it was noticed that the Uzbek militiamen were protecting ʺtheir own people.ʺ Despite the settlement of the conflict by local organizations and the arrest of the instigators, relations remain strained and Russian workers accuse the Uzbeks of wanting to survive the Russians from Uzbekistan.

19.                Kyrgyzstan.  Karakol region. Among the Russian peasants, there is discontent and hostility towards the Kyrgyz due to the uneven distribution of land. The Kyrgyz, who are mainly engaged in cattle breeding, are provided with irrigated lands in incomparably greater quantities. The wealthy strata of the Russian peasantry lease land from the Kirghiz. The poor, being unable to rent, are forced to confine themselves to non‐irrigated land.

20.                Tajikistan.  Kulyab vilayet. The antagonism between the Lokays and Tajiks of the Kungurt Tumen is aggravated by the uneven distribution of irrigated and non‐irrigated lands between them. Tajiks occupying uncomfortable mountainous terrain are trying in every possible way to oust the Lokai.

21.                There are constant clashes between the Uzbeks of the villages of Dangart, Tulamush, Kush‐Bulak and Gul‐Bulak Kungurt Tumen and the Tajiks of neighboring villages on the basis of water use. The Uzbeks are seeking resettlement and demanding their weapons.

22.                Hissar vilayet. There are disputes between the Tajiks of the Dagan region over a plot of land previously owned by the Tajiks and later seized by the Uzbeks. On the demand of the Tajiks to return the land back, the Uzbeks refuse, with the support of some responsible workers. Seeking separation from Kyrgyzstan

23.                Jalal‐Abad canton. A group of people sat down. Batrak‐Abad MailiSay vol. headed by the former chairman of the VIC, he is campaigning among the Uzbek population for separation from Kyrgyzstan and joining Uzbekistan. As a result of the agitation, decisions on separation were drawn up. For a greater impact on the masses, rumors are spreading that the allegedly resettled will be given a pair of bulls and 100 rubles. for each farm. The agitation for separation intensified especially during the re‐election of the Soviets.

24.                Osh canton. Among the Uzbek population of the mountains. Osh is becoming increasingly attracted to separation from Kyrgyzstan and annexation to Uzbekistan, or, in extreme cases, to the creation of an autonomous Uzbek volost with the direct subordination of the Central Election Commission of Kyrgyzstan. The chairmen of both currents led a particularly intensified campaign in the re‐election of the Soviets. The movement is inspired by authoritative co‐workers and part of the Uzbek intelligentsia.

25.                In Isfaninskaya and Chay‐Kuluk vol., Which have ceded to Kyrgyzstan    from      the          former Khodzhent                 district. Uzbekistan, intensified agitation is underway for the annexation of these volosts to Uzbekistan again. Among the initiators, the most active are some senior officials of the Khujand region. Along with this, there were cases when mullahs and ishans of mountains. The Khujands went to the auls, preaching the idea of separation and threatening the unwilling ones with ʺdivine punishmentʺ. Khojand officials are collecting money from the population to send a delegation to Tashkent. The “authorized representative of the Khojent authorities” came to the village of Isfani to draw up a verdict of the population to join Uzbekistan. Some tax officials convince the population that with the accession to Uzbekistan there will be no collection of unified agricultural tax arrears.

KAZAKHSTAN

Re‐election of the Soviets

26.                Ural province.  Dzhambeytinsky u. Another two or three months before the re‐election in the village number 3 Kaldygastinskaya par. two groups were created under the leadership of the beys. At the time of the re‐election, the leaders of the groupings were taken into custody by the peopleʹs judge and then sentenced to one and a half months in prison.

27.                Pre‐election         committee           of            aul          No.         2              of            Buldurta parish. Dzhambeytinsky u. refused to deprive his relative ‐ bai, who has four farm laborers ‐ of the right to vote, despite the decision of the general meeting of peasants.

28.                Akmola province.  A group of members of the Sarysu VIC of the Akmola district headed by the chairman of the VIC called a meeting at the apartment of one of the beys of the village No. 1, at which candidates for the new composition of the VIC were nominated and one of the members of the VIC was sent to the mountains. Akmolinsk in order to find out when there will be re‐elections in the parish and who will be appointed for the campaign. Representative of the group in the mountains. Akmolinsk waited for the appointment of a PEC representative and returned with him to the volost.

29.                Bai aul No. 1 of Kokchetav vol. and the district, preparing for the reelection, convene secret meetings, drawing members of the Komsomol into the number of their supporters. A similar training of bays was noted in the aul No. 6 of Dzhelandinskaya vol. Kokchetavsky u., Where bai gave the secretary of the wolf of the CPSU (b) a fur coat with wolf fur, in aul No. 1 of Tas‐Utkul vol. Atbasar district and in a number of other auls.

In the Azat parish. Akmola u. there is a struggle between two groups, one of which is headed by a member of the CPSU (b), having bays in its composition, the other is led by a former ruler. In the struggle to take over the village councils and VICs, each of them spreads discrediting rumors about the leaders of the hostile group.

30.                In stts. Cherlak (Russian Cossacks) at Petropavlovsky u. two groups of kulaks, former white officers and officials (15 people) were created, who, under the guise of family evenings, gather in private apartments, discussing issues of the re‐election campaign. A similar grouping is noted in stts. Tatar.

In      the     village           of              Nikolaevsky (Russians)       of       the          Soviet

Vol. Kokchetavsky u. a group of former white officers and participants in the February uprising is showing increased activity, agitating among the population to disrupt the re‐election campaign. The group expresses particular discontent with the deprivation of electoral rights. A similar kind of group and individual actions of anti‐Soviet elements are observed in a number of other villages of the Sovetskaya Volost. and in the mountains. Akmolinsk.

Fists with. Andreevskoe        (Russians)            Krasnoarmeiskaya

Vol. Kokchetavsky u. convoke illegal meetings, which discuss the issues of nominating their proteges to the new village council and isolating active Soviet workers in the upcoming re‐elections.

31.                Semipalatinsk province.  The secretary of the Komsomol cell (he is also the chairman of the Koshchi union) of the aul No. 2 of the Naryn parish. Bukhtarminsky u. at a meeting of the Komsomol cell, noting the hopelessness of the poor peasantsʹ independent speech at the reelections, he proposed a policy of blocking with the Bai group. Similar sentiments exist among a number of party members and Komsomol members of the Kurchum‐Altai Volost.

32.                In a number of agricultural commissions of the Soviet vol. UstKamenogorsk district the presence of fists and traders was noted. The clogging of the election commissions led to the granting of election rights to a significant part of the kulaks. In total, 170 people were deprived of electoral rights in the parish, while, according to accurate estimates, there are about 300 kulaks and merchants, clearly subject to deprivation.

Members of the election commission of aul No. 1 of Umanskoy vol. UstKamenogorsk district most of them were supporters of Bayism from the Aitkul clan. As a result, 13 people from this clan, numbering 200 farms, were deprived of their electoral rights, and 12 were deprived of the hostile poor (65 farms).

33.                A group of kulaks and former White Guards of the village. Doloni (Russian Cossacks) Razin parish. Semipalatinskiy u., Dissatisfied with the deprivation of the right to vote, was especially unhappy with the local worker Dikopolsky (a member of the CPSU (b) since 1917), who was distinguished by his activity in carrying out various kinds of campaigns, in particular, tax campaigns, and an intensified struggle against the kulaks and former bandits. As a result, the aforementioned group attacked the disarmed Dikopolsky at night, having previously inflicted a series of blows with sticks and knives and finally chopping off his head. The secretary of the Razinsky VIK, a former active White Guard (Rusinov), who more than once tried to ʺfuseʺ Dikopolsky from the village and the volost, was involved in incitement to the murder.

34.                Dzhetysu lips.  In Balkhash‐Lepsinsky aul, Kokterevsky vol. Lepsinsky u. two tribal groupings were created, fighting for their candidate for the position of chairman of the VIC. The first group is led by a bay mulla of the Cherdzhetym clan. The other is led by a former assistant prosecutor from the Chue clan. A similar group struggle is taking place in the Makancha‐Sandyrovsky aul between the clans Khudif, Malkar, Irchi and Sarka and in the Cherkassky vol., Where the bais act together with the mullah.

35.                Alma‐Ata district in stts. Talgar bai conducted agitation among members of the Koshchi union against participation in the reelection. Campaigning has had positive results. Not a single member of the CK showed up for the pre‐election meeting.

36.                Lepsinsky u. Thanks to the negligence and drunkenness of the authorized electoral commission in the electoral commission of Kokterevsky vol. got a baysk and criminal element (one member is a bribe‐taker, the other is a henchman of the Akhnay clan), etc. A similar situation is in the election commissions of the Makancha‐Sandyrovsky aul of the same district, in the village. Koktal Usek parish Dzharkent district (embezzlers) and in the electoral committee of KzylSyugatinskaya vol. Alma‐Ata district (the authorized person accepted a treat and a horse for traveling from the bai).

37.                A group of bays ‐ ʺdisenfranchisedʺ Eskeldinskaya vol. TaldyKurgan district threatened the pre‐election committee with murder. In with. Issyk Talgar parish the (Russian) ʺdisenfranchisedʺ, former members of the village council, threaten reprisals against the re‐election commissioners, promising to appear at the election meeting and ʺknock out the commissioners with a bang.ʺ

38.                Syr‐Darya province.  Kazalinsky u. In the mountains. In Kazalinsk, an election campaign is under way between the two groups. Members of the CPSU (b) are also involved in the groups, but the bulk of the leadership falls on the bays. The groupings pay particular attention to the recruitment of teachers. On the basis of grouping discrepancies, the head. UNOF fired two teachers, 12 teachers went on strike for the same group reasons for three days, and 13 other teachers intend to leave work forever. The tense mood that arose among the population in connection with the group struggle spread to the entire Kazalinskaya Volost. A similar group struggle is going on in a number of other counties.

39.                In the Turkestan district Yangi‐Kurgan and Chagetaevskaya vol. responsible party workers take part in the group struggle. In most cases, the party organizations of the auls dissolve in the grouping struggle of the cell ‐ either split into two hostile groups, or take the side of one of the Bay groups.

40.                In a number of cases, county and volost election commissions are littered with people leading clan or bai groups. In Chimkent district the authorized representative of the election commission is a member of the Ryskulov group, as a result of which supporters of this group were included in all the election commissions.

In Aulie‐Ata u. bai and their supporters were included in some volelection commissions. In Nizhne‐Talas vol. two members of the electoral commission ‐ bai deprived of the right to vote.

41.                Aulie‐Atinsky district Members of the election commission of Dzhuvalinskaya vol. for fear of being killed, they decided not to deprive anyone of their electoral rights.

42.                Tashkazak district The Koschi Union in many cases takes an active part in various groups. The littering of the union by the bai and their supporters in some places contributes to the massive participation of the members of the Koshchi in the struggle for mastering the grassroots Soviet apparatus. A similar phenomenon is typical for a number of other counties.

The mood of the Russian Cossacks

43.                Ural province.  In connection with the renaming of the villages of Rubezhinskaya Vol. Uralsky u. In the stanitsa among the Russian Cossacks, an opinion of the following nature was established: ʺJust as the tsarist government could not live without the Cossacks, so the Soviet government came to the conclusion that the Russian Cossacks in difficult times could be used better than the peasantry.ʺ From these judgments, the conclusion is drawn about the need to restore the estate Cossacks, after which ʺthe Soviet power will have in the person of the Cossacks an irreplaceable fighter for the power of the working people.ʺ

44.                Akmola province.  At the general meeting of Russian Cossacks stts. Akmolinskaya on the issue of joining the village to the city, delegates were elected to the center to apply for non‐union with the city. The initiators of opposition to the annexation to the city were kulaks and former white officers.

45.                Dzhetysu lips.  After the return of the delegate of the Russian Cossacks from Moscow, the ideologists of the autonomist movement began intensive work among the masses of the Cossacks. In all the villages of Alma‐Ata u. broad meetings were convened with the presentation of reports on the results of the trip. Rumors spread about the centerʹs agreement. Measures were taken to attract the Russian peasantry to their side. Certain leaders of the movement, with the support of the kulaks, are conducting an intensified campaign against new land management work and to disrupt the land reform of 19211922. At the convened meetings of the Cossacks and at narrow meetings of leaders, calls are made to continue the struggle to restore their rights.

46.                Among the Russian Cossacks villages. Gsorgievki, Chuy region, there is an increase in the desire for separation into an autonomous administrative unit.

The ideologists and leaders of the movement are a group of kulaks enjoying great prestige among the Cossack masses and convincing the masses that allegedly ʺthe center (Moscow) approves of the Cossacksʹ aspiration for complete separation from the KSSR.ʺ Two of the leaders went to Moscow with a petition from the Cossacks.

47.                Russian Cossacks villages. Chundzhe Ittifak vol. Dzharkent district dissatisfied with the negligence of the local investigator, who did not understand the numerous complaints of the Cossacks against the Kyrgyz on the basis of systematic damage to meadows and crops. The Cossacks explain this by the connections of the inheritor with the Kirghiz and are especially worried about the approaching spring and the inevitable repetition of the destruction of fields and meadows by the Kirghiz. At one of the meetings, Russian Cossacks threatened to ʺdrive out the Kirghiz with sticks, since the government itself encourages their action.ʺ

48.                Russian Cossacks p. Kuchala Dzharkent u. strive to create a ʺpurely Russian land collectiveʺ without the participation of the Kyrgyz. The local agronomist invites the Cossacks to wait ʺif the power is still Kyrgyz.ʺ In with. Chundzhe, the former chieftain and a number of middle peasants, expressing dissatisfaction with the dominance of the Kyrgyz in the Soviet apparatus, reassure the population with the prospect of ʺan early liberation from the yoke of the naked Kyrgyz, who hold on to bribes and work within a narrow national framework.ʺ

Antagonism between Russians and Kyrgyz

49.            Semipalatinsk province.  In the Oryol vol. Pavlodar district individual kulak groups are campaigning for the separation of the Russian peasant from Kazakhstan. This agitation was especially intensified in connection with the re‐election campaign, and the kulaks kindled the antagonism of the Russians towards the Kirghiz, ʺwho seized the Soviet apparatus into their own hands.ʺ These moods are carried over to the village communists.

50.            In              the          village. Yarakh (Russian)             Pozdnyakovskaya

Vol. Bukhtarminsky u. at the village meeting, a project was discussed on the transfer of 1517 acres of land to 9 Kyrgyz auls of Chingistai vol. Almost the entire population protested against this project, as a result of which the question remained open.

51.            In the village. Soldatovskoy (Russian) of the same volost and uyezd, in connection with the project of transferring 3,608 dessiatines to the Kyrgyz, prosperous elements led an agitation against land management work, inciting antagonism to the Kyrgyz among the Russian peasants.

52.            Dzhetysu lips.  Russian peasantry of the Ittifak vol. Dzharkent district expresses dissatisfaction with the slowdown in land management. There are disputed plots of land, which are simultaneously claimed by both Russians and Kyrgyz. The discontent intensified after the provocative speech of the UZU secretary, who pointed to the ʺhopelessness of the expectations of the Russians.ʺ

Similar discontent of the Russian peasantry on the basis of the uneven distribution of land is noted in the village. Koktal. The Russian dislike of the Kirghiz was also manifested on the issue of organizing a credit partnership, and the Russian peasants categorically opposed the admission of ʺKyrgyz dogsʺ to the partnership.

53.            Russian population s. Serjas Dzharkent u. seeks to be separated into an independent administrative unit. At one of the village meetings, a resolution was passed, which listed the reasons for the separation: “The Soviet and party bodies are Kyrgyz, they do not pay attention to the Russians, the Kirghiz oppress the Russians with systematic injuries of crops and meadows, cattle theft and the seizure of the best lands, schools are open only for the Kyrgyz, only children of the beys are sent to workersʹ faculties ¹⁵⁵. The discontent of the Russians on the basis of the listed issues was noted by the willow. Osman‐Yurt.

54.            Syr‐Darya province.  In connection with the upcoming re‐elections of the Soviets among the Russian peasants of the Arjar Vol. Tashkazak u. the urge to become an independent European volost is increasing. The leaders of the movement (including members of the CPSU) rely on the kulak part of the population.

55.            Mulla and the teacher of the village No. 12 of the Dzhumara vol. Aulie‐Atinsky district together with the former governor, they convened the population of the aul and led an agitation against the surrender of lands to the Russians. The poor at first did not agree. After the initiators slaughtered the cow and arranged a feast, frightening the poor in case of disobedience by levying the cost of the cow, the poor agreed not to surrender their lands to Russian peasants in 1927.

NORTH CAUCASUS 

Election Campaign

56.                Chechnya.  Aslambekovsky district. In with. The Old‐Yurt sect of Sheptukaev Danku, which unites a predominantly prosperous element, is nominating its member, the kulak Beterbiev, as the future of the Presidential Council. The latter, being elected chairman at the reporting meeting, made it possible to speak only to the wealthy, depriving the poor of the word, party members and Komsomol members. During the elections to the electoral commission of the aul, he tore off the list of the local komcell, saying: ʺWe need to choose those who the people want, and not those who are proposed by party members and Komsomol members.ʺ

57.                Galancho District. The electoral commissions of the district included 10 poor people, 19 middle peasants and 9 kulaks. Almost all members of election commissions are murids of the religious sects KuntaKhadzhi and Deni Arsanov.

58.                Itum‐Kalinsky district. According to the reporting reports of the village councils and the okrIK, the population did not act at all and generally behaved passively. Out of 7306 voters in 9 settlements, 2515 people were present at the meetings, including 122 women. In a number of villages, women were not allowed to gather.

59.                Shali District. Under the influence of the tribal elders of the aul Shali, the Okrug Election Commission restored mullah s. Mesker‐Yurt, who heads the Muslim clergy bloc at the 2nd Congress of the Soviets of Chechnya, and a number of aul kulaks, including the toastmaster (leader) of the Gaisum murids ¹⁵⁶. The latter was reinstated at the insistence of the sheikh ^{157 himself}, who intends to appoint his representative to the district power.

60.                Ossetia.  Alagiro‐Ardonsky district. There is low attendance at meetings in the villages of the district. Party and Komsomol organizations have shown complete inactivity. The work began only on the eve of the re‐election and was carried out in a hurry. The reports of the executive committees were biased. Regional workers were carried away by reports on the international situation up to the assertion that in the spring of 1927 a war was inevitable, from this they draw conclusions about the need to elect people loyal and loyal to the Soviet government to the Soviets. This left a heavy impression on the peasants and diverted their interests to the re‐elections themselves (the villages of Ardon, Alagir, Khadgaro).

61.                In the same district, one of the members of the district election commission is a repatriate ¹⁵⁸, and the other is the largest kulak and owner of a brick and tile factory.

62.                In p. Nogkau kulaks were blocked with former privileged surnames, with teachers and intelligentsia, and also with anti‐Soviet and vicious elements of the village. So, in the group there is a former government foreman, the wife of a former bailiff and a former White Guard. The kulaks and the former nobility, in addition to nominating candidates from their midst, at their meetings raised the question of nominating candidates for those party members, poor and middle peasants, through whom it would be possible to exercise their influence in the Council.

63.                In p. Ardon, the kulaks, together with traders and other anti‐Soviet elements, have repeatedly gathered illegal meetings, nominating and discussing candidates from among their midst and middle peasants. The latter did not adhere to them at all, and not a single middle peasant was present at these meetings. The nomination of candidates for the middle peasants was, therefore, a political and tactical trick of the kulaks, counting on the formation of a bloc with the middle peasants at re‐elections.

64.                In p. Salugardonʹs list of ʺdisenfranchisedʺ includes a significant percentage of middle peasants who do not use hired labor, and two active community workers ‐ a teacher with 22 years of experience and a dentist.

65.                Dzaudzhikausky district. He sat down. Party and Fiagdon. The kulaks, anti‐Soviet elements and all the ʺdisenfranchisedʺ were preparing for re‐elections by district, and each initiative group had its own organizers and agitators.

66.                Right‐bank district (Cossack region). The election campaign is weak throughout the district. There is a very inadequate connection of party cells with the poor, farm laborers, KKOV and other public organizations, and in the meets, as, for example, in the villages of Ardonskaya and Nikolaevskaya, it is completely absent. Candidates for the Council are discussed only in a narrow circle of party members. Not a single meeting of the poor and middle peasants has been convened to jointly discuss candidates and nominate the latter and from among them.

67.                The village. Humalag. The kulaks and the well‐to‐do had campaigned long before the re‐elections, aimed at disrupting the elections. At the same time, the kulaks used the middle peasants, telling them that the Council had already been elected from among the communists and that the population was invited so that “the communists would laugh at them”. As a result, the meeting was disrupted.

68.                The village. Brutus. Before the re‐elections, the well‐to‐do part of the village launched wide propaganda for the nomination of their candidates to the Council, as opposed to the candidates of the Party organization and the poor, while using some of the middle peasantry.

69.                Kabardino‐Balkarian region.  In with. Chegem, for personal reasons, deprived a poor man and one Red Army soldier from the electoral committee.

70.                Electoral Commission with. Stary‐Cherek excluded four mullahs from the list of ʺdisenfranchisedʺ, and the pre‐election committee said that the clergy considered the election committee harmless and the same peasants as the others.

71.                Adyghe‐Circassian region.  In the village of Shendzhiy, the kulaks are agitating that the poor in the village council cannot work due to their material insecurity and their inclination, as a result of the latter, to waste.

72.                In the village of Adamiy, four groups have emerged, consisting of kulaks and the wealthy. One of the groups is headed by Effendi ¹⁵⁹ Tambiev. The groups are discussing the issues of nominating their candidates for future Councils.

73.                Ingushetia.  The election committee of the Black Sea farms included: the most prominent murid of the Kunta‐Khadzhi sect, the organizer of the kulaks to fight the lump and the poor at last yearʹs re‐elections of the Soviets, a well‐to‐do from the same sect and a kulak with two permanent workers. All these persons were promoted to the electoral committee thanks to the insistence of the well‐to‐do kulak part of the population and sectarianism. The electoral committee is littered with the Keskemsky united farmsteads: the pre‐electoral committee is an active member of the Kunta‐Khadzhi sect, two members of the electoral committee are also from the Kunta‐Khadzhi sect, middle peasants, antiSoviet.

74.                Karachay.  Khumara district. Member of the regional election committee in the village. Upper Teberda, by his sole decree, excluded from the list of ʺdisenfranchisedʺ a number of kulaks, former cattle thieves and amnestied bandits. The population, outraged by the actions of a member of the electoral commission, is talking about the possibility of a bribe.

Grouping and tribal struggle

75.                Chechnya.  Shatoevsky district. Three candidates for the chairmanship of the okrIK emerged: the current chairman of the okrIK Istamulov, based on the sympathy and support of young people and the Hakkoy clan, peopleʹs judge Muridov, based on a strong tribe of Tsygunoevites, Techuev, head. okrFO, based on wealthy strata of the population. All three are intriguing and compromising each other at various meetings.

76.                Nadterechny district. In the district, four main groups have been identified, striving to capture the district executive committee. The first ‐ the Elderkhanov group, campaigns for elections to the Soviets and delegates to the congress of religious and honorable old people, assuming that only in this case the return of the Elderkhanovs to power is possible. The second ‐ the Kanaev group, headed by Sheikh Kanakhantiev, unites prominent religious authorities of the district and intends to appoint the son of Sheikh Abdurakhman as the chairman of the district. The third ‐ Kadyrovʹs group, headed by the current chairman of the Okrug Kadyrov Akhmat, unites in the majority of the chairmen of the current composition of the Okrug village councils. The fourth, the Davletukayev group, is headed by assistant. Prosecutor Davletukayev and supported by the secretary of the regional committee of the Komsomol Dzhabrailov. The group spreads influence mainly on the Komsomol members. There is reason to believe that this group, in view of its weakness and the kinship of its leaders with Kanaev, will join the Kanaev group.

77.                In the Urus‐Martan district, two generic tendencies are active. The first is Elderkhanova, in a number of villages among her teip (clan) she is actively campaigning for elections to the regional congress of Elderkhanovʹs Soviets. In with. Gekhi (the native village of Tashtemir Elderkhanov), this group managed to persuade almost the entire population to hold Tashtemir, Shakhtemir and Abubakar Elderkhanovs by delegates to the congress. This group intends to disrupt the elections and refuse to participate in the okrug for re‐election of village councils, if it fails to achieve its goals. The second is Khamzatʹs, fearing that the chairman of the regional executive committee Kubanov (head of the regional administration, organizer of the Chechen Komsomol) is campaigning against the latter, spreading provocative rumors about him about bribery, inactivity, etc.

78.                Itum‐Kalinsky district. A fierce struggle is being waged by three contenders for the chairmanship in the okrIK: Uzarov, the current chairman of the okrIK, relying on young people, the Soviet‐minded part of the population and the Khocharoev tribe; Gisaev, secretary of the executive committee, nominated by the Chinahoy family and the kulaks; Zurabov, head. okrzemotdelom, based on religious elements and honorary elders of the Khildekhoroev, Ushkaloy and Tazbichi societies.

79.                Nozhai‐Yurt district. One of the strongest groups in the district is the Tsentoroevsk group, headed by the chief of the district militia Saykhanov Ali and uniting the entire composition of the district. In addition to its kind, the Centoroevskaya group also relies on prominent kulaks and representatives of the Muslim clergy.

80.                Novo‐Chechensky district. The clan elders of the Nashkhoevsky, Khocharoevsky and Chinahoevsky clans (common roots of origin), through related authorities and Muslim clergy, are conducting intensified propaganda for the return to power in Chechnya of the Elderkhanov family. Agitation is especially developed in the villages of Achkhoy‐Martan, Zakan‐Yurt and Katyr‐Yurt, where these tribes predominate in numbers. A similar campaign for the Elderkhanovs is being conducted in the Nadterechny district.

81.                Karachay.  In the village of Loovskoye, former princes from the family of Loovs and Sheremetevs advocated the overwhelming majority of the population for abandoning the old pre‐village council Mahonov, which was in close relations with the princely families, during the re‐election. In contrast to Maonovʹs candidacy, a poor group of peasants campaigns for their representative, the poor, Arov.

82.                Aul Shakhgireevsky. At a joint meeting of the poor and middle peasants, a major dispute arose between nobles and peasants over representation in the Council. As a result, the meeting was disrupted.

The course of the re‐election of the Soviets

83.                Chechnya. Galancho District. In with. Nashkhoi representatives of the election commission, staying with the chairman of the village council Gelogaev (a former mullah, a kulak, deprived of the right to vote), began to drink. The population, notified of the arrival of the representatives of the election commission, began to gather at the appointed time. However, those who came to the meeting did not appear, and much later suggested that the society gather near Gelogayevʹs house. The society refused to go there, inviting the members of the election commission to come to them. In response to this, the electoral commission sent the chief of militia and Gelogayev to a gathering, where the latter with naked weapons invited those who had gathered to go to the house of the pre‐village council. On the second refusal, the chief of militia and the pre‐village council opened fire and began to beat the assembled people with the handles of revolvers. The gathering began to disperse to their homes and the elections did not take place.

84.                Cheberloevsky district. In with. The Nokhchuyeloi kulak group, united by the sectʹs mastermind Magomet Emin Aksaltinsky Salshev, opposed the candidacy of Khuseinov, a party member designated by the Okrug election committee for the pre‐village council. As a result of the speeches of the kulaks, Salshevʹs protege, Shaakalov, passed by a majority of votes as chairman of the village council. Salshev himself was elected a delegate to the district congress of Soviets.

85.                Nadterechny district. In with. V. Naur at the re‐election meeting ʺdisenfranchised kulaksʺ and their relatives opposed the list put forward by the election commission, demanding that the poor man Tazurkaev announce his list, drawn up on behalf of the whole society. When this list was announced, it turned out that it included almost all the kulaks and only a few poor people under the influence of the kulaks. The insistent demands of the latter to accept the second list forced the pre‐election committee to close the gathering and postpone the re‐election of the village council for an indefinite period. On the same day, in the evening, in the house of Mulla Kosuev, in the presence of 10 ʺactivistsʺ, a meeting was held, at which it was decided to send delegates to the regional executive committee with a complaint about the incorrect conduct of the meeting, its disruption, etc.

86.                Gudermes District. S. Tsontoroi. During the nomination of candidates to the village council, a major dispute broke out between the teips (clans) of Tsontoroy and Bena, which turned into a fight. As a result of the fight, several people were beaten and one was seriously wounded in the head with a dagger. At the second meeting, the Tsontoroites won a victory, having appointed their representative to the chair of the village council.

87.                Sharoevsky district. The poor population took almost no part in the re‐elections. Village councils were hardly renewed by 50%. The reason is the struggle between two groups ‐ Khasanov and Kadilov. The latter, relying on the kulaks, managed to hold three well‐to‐do chairmen of the village council. A total of 15 pre‐village councils were re‐elected, of which four were kulaks.

88.                Ossetia.  Alagiro‐Ardonsky district. In with. Nogkau, where, thanks to the provocation of kulaks and other anti‐Soviet elements, the first meeting was disrupted, the second meeting was held in an extremely unhealthy and tense atmosphere. The kulaks, having nominated up to 12 candidates, organized around themselves a significant part of the middle peasants, using them to disrupt the candidates of the village activists. As a result, out of 15 candidates of the asset, only three passed to the Council. The remaining 12 people to the Council were elected from the candidates of the wealthy and kulak group of the village.

89.                Right‐bank district. In with. Humalag out of 2070 voters came to reelection 812 people; when the list of the party organization was announced, the head of the kulak group, deprived of electoral rights, snatched the list from the hands of the authorized person, intending to tear it up. The present kulaks, the well‐to‐do and some of the middle peasants, shouted in chorus: ʺDown with this list, we ourselves will be able to choose the right people.ʺ Two middle peasants addressed the meeting with the words: “Party members are all hooligans and their list is hooligan. Enough for them to rob us. We do not want to tolerate communists in the village council. ʺ

90.                Stts. Ardonskaya of the same district. As a result of the provocation of the kulaks and former White Guards that the Soviet had already been elected from among the communists, no one came to the meetings in the 1st and 2nd precincts for the re‐election.

National antagonism

91.                Dagestan.  Achikulak district. 2114 Russian farms were involved in paying the Unified Agricultural Tax, and ¹⁶⁰ ‐ 169 Turkmen‐Nogai farms, while in the region Russians make up only 45% of the total population. In this regard, the Russian population expresses strong discontent.

92.                Karachay Autonomous Region. In stts. Zelenchukskaya at the bazaar, where many peasants from the surrounding villages of the Armavir District and Karachay had gathered, a fight arose between the Karachai and the Cossack. A group of Karachais, interceding for their fellow tribesman, surrounded the Russians, wanting to beat them up. The present policemen (Karachais), wishing to disperse the crowd, fired several shots into the air. This was the reason that the Cossacks began to beat the Karachais, who were forced to flee with the police. One of the Cossacks (a member of the All‐Union Communist Party), wishing to calm the crowd of Cossacks, aroused strong indignation of the others, who almost beat him for the fact that ʺhe and other communists are protecting the Karachais.ʺ There were about 250 Cossacks who took part in the fight. Among them, antagonism towards the Karachais and the desire to ʺdeal with these Asiansʺ is strongly developed.

93.                Russian population s. The Marukhskoe and Panteleimonovskoe of the Arkansas region expresses strong dissatisfaction with the remoteness of the peopleʹs court, the hospital and the executive committee and the biased attitude of Karachai workers towards “not their own”. On this basis, a petition is again initiated for the separation of Russians from the Karachay region.

94.                Up to 250 shareholders (Russians and Karachais) attended the reelections of the EPO board. The proposal of the oblZU instructor about the need to introduce at least one Karachai into the board of directors met with strong opposition from the majority of the Russians present, grouped around the Varfolomeev pre‐village council. As a result, not a single Karachai was included in the EPO. In this regard, the Karachais withdrew from the members of the cooperative with. Marukhsky and organized a cooperative at the village of Morkh (Karachaevsky). The initiator of the latter was the pre‐village council of the aul Morkh Kaitov, on whose proposal the psalmist Nattochiy, who was the head of the village, was elected as a responsible clerk (the board was not elected). Marukhsky. This fact caused discontent among the population with. Marukhsky, indicating that Nattochiy betrayed the interests of the Russian population.

95.                Adyghe‐Circassian region Ponezhukaevsky district. In the village of Dzhidzhikhabl, a land dispute is going on between the indigenous people (Circassians) and nonresidents (Tatars and Armenians). The dispute is caused by the fact that the Circassians in 1925 prohibited nonresidents living in this area for 10 to 20 years from cultivating the land, seizing it on their own. The Circassians chose walkers to be sent to Moscow with a petition to seize land from nonresidents. In addition, they sold public land for 100 rubles. to pay a defender to conduct a disputed case with nonresidents.

96.                Nearby st. The Kurgan Armavir District is working to strengthen the banks of the river. Labs. Due to the fact that the riverbed is being led out in a new direction, about 500 dessiatines are cut off from the Blechepsky yurt, and 60 dessiatines from the Koshekhablsky, which caused strong discontent among the mountaineers of the auls mentioned. In the village of Lechepsin of the Natyrbovskiy district, a group of 20 Circassians gathered on the square, one of whom, a middle peasant, suggested that the gathering should organize and expel the Kurgan (Russians) from the yurt. The speech was prevented only thanks to the explanations of the plenum of the RIK, what is happening in       the          village   of                 Lechepsin,           about     the          illegality               of            such actions. However, the relationship of the Circassians with the Russians is so aggravated that if the work is not suspended, then the possibility of clashes between them is not excluded.

97.                At the reporting meeting of the Adamy village (Preobrazhensky district), the mountaineers protested against the appointment of the pre‐election committee of the Russian aul, not the Circassian. A similar phenomenon was registered in the village of Hatukai. Under the pressure of the protest, the election commissions of both villages were re‐elected.

In the debate on the report of the Natyrbovskiy RIK at the plenum of the village council of Khodz, a member of the latter, Agirov, on behalf of the population of the village, with the support of the plenum, demanded that the 650 dessiatins selected in 1920 by the Russian farms Shelkovnikov and Gidrotsky be recognized as indisputable.

The Circassian population of the village of Dzhidzhikhabal protested that their representative did not enter the sellerskom elected at the plenum of the village council. The election commission was elected from five Russians, one Armenian and one Greek.

98.                Kabardino‐Balkarian region.  Primalkinsky District (Cossack District). On the night of February 8, a fire broke out in the office of the regional executive committee. Due to the lack of a fire brigade, we had to contact the population of stts. Cool with an offer to take part in the elimination of the fire. However, the Russian population of the stanitsa categorically refused, explaining that it was not their executive committee that was burning, but the Kabardian one, and that let the Kabardians themselves put out the fire. In this regard, the fire was not immediately extinguished. The total amount of the loss is 3,500 rubles.

ORDER 

Fight for the co‐apparatus

99.                Georgia. Borchalinsky u. In with. Arukhlo (Tatar) group of kulaks led by activists ʺdisenfranchisedʺ conducted extensive preparations for the re‐election, identifying their candidates for the village council, threatening to kill members of the election commission and publicly speaking out against the Soviet regime.

100.             In the same district, kulaks with. Irganchay (Tatars) called two secret meetings. At the first meeting (organizational), a general plan of preparation for re‐elections was outlined, and at the second, candidates for the village council were outlined. The participants in the meetings campaigned among the poor for not paying the unified agricultural tax and insurance premiums.

101.             Ozurgeti district A group of former Mensheviks spoke in an organized manner at the re‐election meeting of Bagevsky in an attempt to disrupt the re‐election. Seated in various places, the members of the group staged obstructions, interrupting speakers and throwing provocative remarks.

A group of old Mensheviks, dissatisfied with the re‐elections of the Likhaurskiy district executive committee, reported to the executive committee about the allegedly incorrectly held elections. The executive committee ordered a secondary re‐election. The population of those expressed strong dissatisfaction with the annulment of the first reelections, and the local Komsomol members, refusing to appear for the second re‐elections, declared that they ʺdid not intend to play children.ʺ There were more kulaks at the meeting than at the first, and the candidacies of the Communists failed, and the former Mensheviks were received with cries of ʺgood, good.ʺ Former Mensheviks, participants in the August uprising and members of the Young Marxist (Menshevik) organization took an active part.

102.             Dushetsky district in with. Novdarant‐Kari and Arashend at the apartment of a former member of the constituent assembly of the Menshevik Tatishvili, a meeting of former Mensheviks was held, at which the candidacy of the chairman of the Sagurom executive committee was nominated.

103.             Azerbaijan. Lankaran u. Fist s. Massaly Kerimov, a former Musavatist, has repeatedly convened secret meetings of his supporters long before the re‐election. At the same time, Kerimov instructed the head of the kulak group with. Huseyn‐Ajily Kerim‐oglu, who conveyed Kerimovʹs directives regarding the candidacy of the chairman of the new composition of the village council at the kulak meeting of his village. At this meeting, a list of the entire composition of the village council was drawn up, in which 24 candidates from Kerimovʹs supporters were nominated ʺwith the provision of the poor to outline the remaining 14 candidates.ʺ At the re‐election meeting, a dispute arose over the candidacies. One of the kulaks hit the poor man, which was the reason for a fight between the kulaks and the poor, as a result of which one of the participants was killed, one was seriously wounded and several people were slightly wounded.

104.             Cuban y. In with. Chichi Rustovsky daira, the kulak group, led by the mullah, before the start of the re‐election announced that if party members are nominated to the Council, they will leave the elections. Thanks to their activity, the list of the poor was ruined, and elements alien to the Soviet regime got into the Council. A poor man, a protege of the mullah, who is under the influence of the kulaks, was elected to the presidential council.

105.             Armenia.  Daralagyazsky district in with. Gandewaz, the former Dashnaks, led a vigorous campaign for re‐election of the Council, using local spiritual communities to attract supporters. In with. The former Dashnaks of Kara‐Glukh convened an illegal meeting, at which they decided to defiantly leave the re‐election meeting if the communists were included in the new village council.

106.             In the same county in the village. Chiva (Tatars), long before the re‐elections, two groups were formed ‐ one led by beks and mullahs, the other ‐ poor people led by members of the Communist Party of Armenia. Relations between the groups are highly strained. Bekovʹs group has outlined a list of its candidates, mostly speculators and fanatics.

107.             Zangezur district in with. Artsevanike of the Kafan district kulaks Meirangulyan, a former Dashnak, and Zakharyan are convening a meeting of former Dashnaks and kulaks of the village in order to speak in an organized manner at the upcoming re‐elections of the Council. These persons are not yet active among the peasants, limiting themselves only to grouping their supporters around themselves and preparing the latter to speak out in the elections in their defense.

Leadership of the re‐election of party organizations and the Komsomol

108.             Georgia.  Akhaltsykh u. In Zemo‐Tolosh, those in the middle were not admitted to the meeting of the poor together with the members of the Komsomol, at which candidates for the Soviets were discussed. The latter, dissatisfied, declared that this would force them to join the kulaks.

109.             Borjomi district In Nizhne‐Bakurians, there is a lack of communication between the poor and the middle peasants. The latter, thanks to the active work of the former Mensheviks, for the most part adhere to the well‐to‐do kulak elements. There is a close bond between the poor and the laborers, and they defend each otherʹs interests.

110.             Ozurgeti district in connection with the hanging of the lists of the faction in the Sachamia‐Seri region, the peasants were dissatisfied with the fact that the lists were drawn up without the participation of the masses. Gathering in groups at the posted lists, the peasants complained about ʺrestrictions on the rights of voters, any speech which is considered directed against the party.ʺ

111.             In the Nigoichi themes of the same county, at a joint re‐election meeting of the poor with the active of the middle peasants, three former Mensheviks spoke out against the list of candidates for the Soviets, who said: “You chose the candidates yourself, why then were we called. Remove trade union members from the list, they are not our comrades, as they receive salaries. ʺ

112.             Kutaisi district A group of former Mensheviks s. The Maglaki, together with the former landowners, are campaigning for the disruption of the election campaign, spreading among the population dissatisfaction with the ʺlack of democracy in the elections.ʺ

113.             Shorapansky the preparatory work in Tavasskoye by those went very poorly. Not a single meeting of the poor was held. The registration of voters was not carried out and a list of ʺdisenfranchisedʺ was not drawn up.

114.             Gori district Upon re‐election of the Council with. Darby, not a single member of the local com‐cell has entered the new Council. Such a failure was the result of the work of a group of former Mensheviks and kulaks, who carried out intensified agitation against the communist cell.

115.             Azerbaijan.  Kazakh y. In with. Wings of the Aghstafa region, poor people, agitated by fists, applied for the secretary of the cell, and at the re‐elections they opposed him. As a result, the secretary of the cell was not sent to the village council.

116.             Armenia.  Daralagyazsky district at the meeting of the poor with. Ainazur was not admitted to the middle peasants, despite their repeated requests. As a result, the middle peasants and part of the poor did not appear at the re‐election meeting, saying, ʺWhy should we participate when you recognize only the poor.ʺ

Election commission

117.             Georgia.  Tiflis district Among others, a former Menshevik, a member of the party committee (agronomist), joined the Bogvin Temizabirkomissia. Despite the organized protest of the poor against this candidacy, the pre‐executive committee left it in force.

118.             Deputy. the chairman of the Mangliya Temizbirkomissiya supported the wealthy, announcing at a meeting of the commission that there was not a single peasant with a permanent farm laborer in those, while about 300 farm laborers were registered for those.

119.             Election Commission p. The relocations of the Chiatura district of the same district did not deprive the former Menshevik, an active participant in the August uprising, Colonel Chachanidze, who is currently receiving 2,000 rubles from his own houses. annually.

120.             Kutaisi district in with. Maglaki, according to the instructions, was deprived of the voting rights of a group of former landowners. The representative of the KKE Ukom reinstated all those who were deprived of their rights, and two former Mensheviks with ties to the kulaks were elected to the election commission.

In Khalil‐Chaklinsky, those elected to the mission are not deprived of election rights by former Mensheviks, secret agents under the Menshevik government and the former chief of staff of the Menshevik

Peopleʹs Guard.

121.             Borchalinsky district A number of persons implicated in various abuses and having connections with former Musavatists entered the Emir‐Assanovskaya election commission (Tatars). In those, kulaks with two farm laborers were not deprived of election rights.

122.             Gori district the election commission of the village of Mamiskama has deprived a member of the All‐Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks since 1921, arguing that he is engaged in trade. It was established that the deprived had never engaged in trade.

123.             Borjomi district in the mountains. Borjomi among those deprived of the right to vote are: 1) a party candidate with a large family and a house of three rooms; 2) a ranger, an old revolutionary (1905, exiled to Siberia for three years); 3) a worker of the gas‐filling department (has a house of four rooms); 4) a worker who had a small booth in 1920, etc. Along with this, those who have dachas rented in summer for a large fee, a former Menshevik, a merchant, etc., are not deprived of the right to vote.

124.             Azerbaijan.  Nagorno‐Karabakh. In with. Janinzh of the Varandi region has been deprived of the right to vote, a poor man for stuttering and unable to speak out. A former policeman is the chairman of the Armenavan agricultural commission.

125.             Nakhichevan region. All L. Paraga of the Paraginsky region (border) among the members of the election commission was Agamalov, a former deputy. the head of the local national hundred under the Dashnaks, who has a mill and a farm laborer and at the same time is the finagent of the executive committee. The peasants are dissatisfied, except for Agamalov, and a member of the election commission Aliev, who, like Agamalovʹs farm laborer, will fulfill the wishes of his master.

126.             Gandzhinsky u. Electoral Commission with. The Slavian woman of the Bayan Daira deprived 183 people of the right to vote, of which 115 applied for restoration. As a result, 25% of the ʺdisenfranchisedʺ were reinstated. There have been cases of collective petitions by ʺdisenfranchisedʺ groups of poor people joining the petition for reinstatement.

127.             Karyaginsky district Ishihlinskaya rural election commission deprived of the right to vote the former Nikolaev judge and assistant. yuzbashi, who served for 5 years under tsarism. Despite this, the day‐election commission did not approve the protocol of the election commission, reinstating the indicated persons in the election. Poor people believe that this was facilitated by the chairman of the district executive committee, Mamedov, who, upon arrival in the village, always stops at the said persons, the kulaks were very pleased with the restoration of the latter.

128.             Armenia.  Erivansky. To the election commission with. Igub passed through a former active Dashnak, who forced the commission to deprive a demobilized Red Army soldier who is actively working in the school council and in the KKOV. A similar phenomenon was noted in a number of villages of the Leninakan district.

129.             Election Commission p. Donguzian of the same county left the kulaks‐usurers with the right to vote, giving money to peasants at interest.

In with. Verkhnyaya Akhta is not deprived of the right to vote for a number of Dashnaks, merchants and kulaks with several farm laborers.

130.             Pre‐Council with. Kuchuk‐Vedi, at a meeting of the local election commission, insisted on depriving the two poor people of the right to vote, fearing that they, knowing about his crimes in office, would expose them at the rural settlement. A similar phenomenon was noted in the village. Bjni.

131.             Daralagyaz district in a number of cases, all over the county, the election commissions made mistakes, distorting the instructions for reelections in terms of deprivation of election rights. In some places, members of election commissions openly defended kulaks and clergymen, opposing the deprivation of their election rights. In the villages of Niva, Gere, Martiros, Almalu and in a number of others,

Komsomol members defended the beks (former landowners).

132.             In the same county, in a number of villages, the election commissions deprived the poor and middle peasants, personal enemies of the commission members, of the vote. In some cases, the motives for exclusion (suspicion of theft, maintenance of farm laborers) turned out to be invalid during the check.

Littering of new village councils

133.             Georgia.  Kutaisi u. The Council with. Vanya was passed by two former nobles, one former Menshevik and one former Federalist. The Council with. Zeda‐Tsikhisulori was a former Menshevik and chairman of the Zemstvo. The Council with. Tkelovani was a former Menshevik. Two former nobles and a former Menshevik entered the Salinsky Village Council. Two former nobles entered the Isrit village council.

134.             Tiflis district Two poor people, the protectors of the kulaks and the defenders of their interests, went to the Bogvin Council.

135.             Dushetsky. At a joint meeting with. Tskhvediats, Bibliani and Chabarushi, 6 former active Mensheviks and one democrat entered the new village council. In with. Novdarant‐Kari, a former Menshevik was elected as a candidate for the village council.

136.             Akhalkalaki district in with. Khulgumo out of 246 voters was present only 80 people, of whom 30% are kulaks, 50% are middle peasants and 20% are poor. One who had a permanent laborer, and the other, a middle peasant, a former member of the Cross Committee, who was sentenced to three months in prison for issuing a forged poverty certificate, entered the village council.

137.             Azerbaijan.  Cuban y. The chairman of the village council of the ʺKuzunʺ society of the Anekh dair was a participant in the 1920 uprising. Despite the poor peasantsʹ complaint, the district executive committee did not take any measures to withdraw it.

138.             In the same district, a mullah was elected secretary of the Busarchay village council of the Khudat dair, at the same time the head of a subdivision of the registry office ¹⁶¹. Also, kulaks with 50‐70 pedigree rams, 4‐8 horses, 15 heads of cattle, etc. are not deprived of the right to vote and are elected members of the village council.

139.             Lankaran district Borobiginsky daira. A well‐known kulak, who had been deprived of voting rights for all the years, joined the Miankuy village council. Nukhinsky u. In with. Bashkungut of the 2nd dayra, the chairman of the village council and the chairman of the district executive committee, against the wishes of the peasants, held four Nikolaev yuzbashi (foreman) and one kulak‐merchant in the new village council.

140.             Gandzhinsky u. In with. In the Karadjamirli of the Seyfalli daira, the election commission granted the right to vote to a kulak with two farm laborers, a cattle buyer, a former foreman under the tsarism and a wealthy one. The latter went to the village council, where he was promoted to chairman by a majority vote, despite the fact that the farm laborers and the poor were against him.

INNER NATIONAL REPUBLIC 

Re‐election of the Soviets

141.             Crimea.  Bakhchisarai region. The mass deprivation of voting rights is reflected in the attendance of peasants at pre‐election meetings. So, in the Kush village council, 22% attended the meeting, in the Mamashay village council, out of 325 voters, 40 people came to the meeting, in the villages of Ak‐Sheikh and Choshkara, out of the total number of 350 voters, 73 people were present.

142.             Dzhankoy region. The peasants of the Novo‐Pokrovsky village council are expressing strong dissatisfaction with the instruction on deprivation of voting rights. The middle peasants say: ʺThe Soviet government insists on the alliance of the poor with the middle peasants, but deprives us of the right to vote.ʺ Some Germans say: ʺWe need another war.ʺ

Due to the extremely formal approach of the election commissions to the issue of deprivation of voting rights, the percentage of “disenfranchised” in some places is very high. So, in the village. TyupDzhankoy 80% of all local peasants are deprived of voting rights, in the village. Bohemia is deprived of 35%, in the Jarak village council ‐ 30%, etc., in this regard, the mood of the peasants is depressed.

143.             Kerch region. The announcement of the list of those deprived of their voting rights had a depressing effect on the pre‐election meeting of v. Skasiev‐Fountain. There was not a single speech on the report. The peasants complain about too large a percentage of ʺdisenfranchisedʺ, saying that if this continues, then ʺeveryone will rule the country, but not the peasants.ʺ

144.             Evpatoria region. In a number of villages, due to the negligence of the electoral commissions, kulaks, well‐to‐do people, who use hired labor with a clearly exploitative purpose, former landowners, speculators and other anti‐Soviet elements are not deprived of the right to vote. Similar phenomena are observed in the Dzhankoy region.

145.             Evpatoria region. The struggle between the kulaks and the poormiddle peasant bloc in a number of cases took on a fierce character, with the middle peasant mass being the most active. Along with this, there are cases of a bloc between the kulaks and part of the middle peasants against the poor.

146.             Kerch region. Kulak group with. Marfovka spoke out at a preelection meeting against the comfraction list. As a result of this speech, a group of middle peasants, who fell under the influence of the kulaks, left the meeting with a curse.

147.             Simferopol region. The kulaks and well‐to‐do peasants in a number of villages are in a hurry to obtain fictitious information about their ill health, which allegedly forced them to resort to hired labor. In Dzhankoy District, many well‐to‐do people already have this kind of information.

148.             Dzhankoy region. On the basis of sharp dissatisfaction with the defeat of their rights, the ʺdisenfranchisedʺ organize groups. Thus, in the Novo‐Aleksandrovsk village council, the kulak group agitates among the population against the communists, adhering to the slogan ʺCouncil without communists.ʺ

149.             Feodosia region. In the village. Alikech, a group of kulaks and well‐to‐do people, with the participation of former White Guards and Makhnovists, having learned that they were going to deprive them of their voting rights, began to threaten the election commission. The election commission, frightened of revenge, did not deprive them of the right to vote.

150.             Evpatoria region. Fist [from] the village. Kir‐Kulak, deprived of the right to vote, smashed the head of the secretary of the local election commission with a stone. A similar case was noted in the Orchinsky village council of the Karasubazar region.

151.             Bashkiria.  Sterlitamak canton. Burinskaya vol. Anurusky village council. The pre‐election committee, in order to become the chairman of the village council, organized a group of 7 people from hucksters and deprived of voting rights, who, according to his instructions, tried to take him to the village council.

152.             Fedorovskaya parish. In the village. Balakly, before the start of the election meeting, the Muslim Spiritualists held agitation demanding the restoration of the rights of the mullahs; the old people present at the meeting confirmed the demand of the mullahs. The demands turned into noise, as a result the meeting was disrupted, and the representative of the VIC was almost beaten. Shouts were heard in the crowd: “Down with the authorized VIC”.

153.             Burunovsky and Sairan village councils. Election commissions do not conduct any work on re‐elections, do not hold any meetings among the poor, farm laborers and women, lists of those deprived of electoral rights were posted only on election day.

154.             Belebeevsky canton. In the villages of St. Turbeeva and Kurieva at the re‐elections, the well‐to‐do people demanded that the mullahs be exempted from the tax and their rights restored. The entire congregation joined them.

Belebey canton, Shukadyshamak vol. At the re‐elections in a number of Tatar villages, the well‐to‐do and kulaks demanded that the mullahs be exempted from various taxes and permission to open religious schools.

155.             T. Katai canton. Tamiyano‐Tangaurovskaya vol. A kulak with agricultural machinery and hired labor was elected chairman of the Kiyazgulovsky village council.

156.             Birsk canton. At the re‐election of the Anastasva village council, a group of kulaks opposed the candidates put forward by the faction, as a result of which the list was failed and kulaks were elected chairman and his deputy.

157.             Tataria.  In the Arsk canton, there were cases of deprivation of the right to vote for beggars, old people and old women, at the same time, members of the muezzin families, allegedly cultivating the land, were not deprived of the right to vote. The percentage of those deprived of election rights has increased significantly compared to last year. So, in the Kalinin parish. deprived of 570 people against 90 people last year, in Mamsinskaya vol. ‐1126 against 370 people. In the Chistopol canton there are 3 ʹ/ 2 times more ʺdisenfranchisedʺ people in comparison with the previous year.

158.             At the reporting meeting in the village. Small Shashmy, a peasant (middle peasant) who spoke out demanded the expansion of the right to doctrine, the provision of free doctrine without age restrictions, and also spoke out against the deprivation of the voting rights of the muezzins ¹⁶².

Kulle‐Kiminskaya vol. In the village. Bakhtichigr peasants, under the influence of the mullahʹs agitation in the mosque, demanded that the village council be removed from their village.

159.             Spassky canton. Alkeevskaya Vol. In a number of villages, the well‐to‐do are actively campaigning among the population against the candidates put forward by the poor. A similar phenomenon is observed in B. Matakovskaya Vol.

160.             Chistopol canton. There are abnormalities regarding the deprivation of electoral rights of former white officers. Thus, officers who took an active part in the work of the Red Army are deprived of the right to vote.

161.             Chuvashia.  Yadrinsky u. Chuvash‐Sorminskaya vol. In the current pre‐election campaign of persons deprived of voting rights, there are 334 people in the parish against 82 last year.

Aleiskaya vol. In a number of villages, kulaks, in order to get into village councils, solder voters.

Paldaevskaya Vol. village Pidelen. The candidates nominated at the meeting of the poor peasants for the new composition of the village council were defeated by the well‐to‐do who participated in the electoral meeting, who attracted part of the middle peasants to their side.

162.             Cheboksary district Some former traders and kulaks, who were all elected by members of the village council, were not deprived of the right to vote by the Akulevskaya Selizbirkomissia. Subsequently, the elections were postponed by the electoral commission and 12 people were additionally deprived of their electoral rights.

Akramovskaya vol. At the re‐election of the village council village. Polgach‐Kasakh, the prosperous and middle peasants failed to nominate the poor activists, as a result of which the wealthy was elected chairman of the village council.

Togoshevskaya parish in the village. Syatra‐Kasakh was a kulak as chairman of the village council.

163.             Tsivilsky u. Shikhazanovskaya vol. In the village. Nizh. In Malykh‐Bikishkakh, a kulak‐moonshiner was elected chairman of the village council, who opposed the release of a wall newspaper by the Komsomol members in memory of Lenin.

Shibylginskaya vol. Election meeting in the village. Shchor‐Kasakh was held with the participation of persons deprived of election rights, as a result of which the head of the organization of a religious cult and a deserter of the civil war were elected to the village council.

Ubeevskaya Vol. In the village. Yashkildino under the pressure of kulaks by members of the village council passed: the son of a kulak, two well‐to‐do people renting land from the poor.

Three cases of threats to kill the chairmen of election commissions from the side of ʺdisenfranchisedʺ were registered.

164.             Batyrevsky u. The kulaks are intensively preparing for the reelection, trying to get into the village councils. In the village. Aasanovʹs kulaks posted a list of candidates to the village council. The kulaks who were present at the meeting of the poor peasants, sharply condemning the poor peasantsʹ meetings, declared: ʺHow can you not designate your candidates for the Soviet ‐ we will fail them anyway.ʺ Nazantagonism

165.             Crimea.  Yalta region. Der. Kuchuk‐Uzen. Relations between Russians and Tatars are aggravated in connection with the agitation of the local peasant not to give the Russians land. Under the influence of the latter, at a meeting of the zemstvo, it was decided not to give land to the newcomers (Russians).

166.             Der. Simeiz. In the Komsomol cell, there is an antagonism between the Russians and the Tatars, exacerbated by the partiality of the cell secretary (Tatar) and a different approach to “ours” and “not ours”.

167.             Evpatoria region. Aggravated relations between Russians and Tatars were noted among the members of the Donuzlavskoe agricultural partnership. After the re‐election, the majority of the Tatars joined the new board. The new management completely ignores the Russian shareholders, in connection with which the latter submitted a collective statement expressing no confidence in the newly elected management of the agricultural partnership.

168.             Tataria.  Bugulma canton. Aznakaevskaya vol. On the basis of improper agricultural taxation, national hostility arises between the Russian and Tatar population. So, der. Aznakaevo (Tatar), with 350 households, is taxed with an agricultural tax in the amount of 3,500 rubles, and the village. Timashevo (Russian) in the presence of 70‐80 yards is taxed in the amount of 3100 rubles. almost equitable allotment of land. When granting benefits for agricultural tax, out of 20 applications from Russians, Aznakayevsky VIC satisfies two, while out of 20 Tatar applications it satisfied 13‐14.

169.             Chistopol canton. Between the Russians and Tatars of the Maly Tolikash villages of the Galaktionovskaya Volost. and Romashkino Kargalinsky parish. national enmity is observed on the basis of uneven distribution of land (in Romashkino, the Tatars have 30 sazhens per capita, and in Maly Tolikash, 14 sazhens per capita).

170.             Arsk canton. There is national enmity between the Russian and Tatar populations, caused by the biased attitude towards the Russian population on the part of the chairman of the executive committee. Thus, in the distribution of timber, the Tatar villages, which by the number of households are much smaller than the Russians, received timber by 60% more than the Russians. The latter express strong dissatisfaction with this circumstance.

171.             Chuvashia.  Batyrevsky u. Speaking at a meeting of representatives of Batyrevsky u. the Tatar said: ʺWe, Tatars, used to be dependent on Ivan the Terrible, and now we are dependent on the Chuvash and are under their yoke.ʺ This point of view was expressed by a number of other speakers, in connection with which the question of the transition from the CASSR to the TASSR was raised. The meeting selected a special person for agitation among the population for the separation from the Chuvash Republic and two commissioners for petition to the authorities of the Tatar Republic.

Tatar villages located on the territory of Batyrevsky u. to apply for the separation from the Czechoslovakia, 5 Tatars were elected as delegates, who must unite with the delegates from the TASSR for final negotiations on the separation from the Chuvash Republic.

172.             Alatyrskiy. Poretskaya parish (Mordovian and Russian population). Poor peasants, referring to the issue of annexing the Alatyr district. to the Chechen ASSR, they say: ʺThe Chuvashes now live much better than we, the Mordovians, because they are supported by the government and they themselves sit in power, how do not fight, but all their own shirt is closer to the body.ʺ A similar discontent is seen among former employees who have been removed from their posts for various misconduct. The latter say: “Alatyrskiy u. will move from the Chuvash to another province, the Chuvash fired all Russian workers from the service, such as: the chairman of the PEC, head. general department and others. ʺ

173.             Tsivilsky. and volost (Russian population). Peasant s. Ivanova in a group of fellow villagers who had gathered, condemning the actions of the Chuvash government for carrying out the implementation of the Chuvash language, said: “I don’t know how we will live. Chuvash are everywhere, and Russians die of hunger. So, I served as a pom. the head of the correctional house in Tsivilsk, well, the trouble, he could not bear it, he left his post. Before he had time to leave, the Chuvashin was immediately imprisoned. Just some kind of crush on the Russians. ʺ BURYAT‐MONGOLIA,                OYROTIA,          KHAKASSKY    DISTRICT, KALMYK REGION

Re‐election of the Soviets

174.             Buryat‐Mongolia.  A number of election commissions have members of former bandits (Alarsky aimak ‐ Tangutsky buluk, Bokhansky aimak ‐ Tikhonovsky village council), former Kolchak residents (Alarsky aimak, Yu. Tangutsky buluk, Troitskosavsky ‐ Selenginsky khoshun ¹⁶³), former police officers. Troitskosavsky aimak ‐ Selenginsky village council), a former member of the Socialist Revolutionary Party (Alar aimak ‐ Alar‐Khiginsky village council) and merchant (Alar aimak ‐ Shakhovsky village council).

175.             Mountains. Verkhneudinsk. Deprived of electoral rights, a working guest house (former warrant officer) said that there should be a war in the near future, since those deprived of electoral rights, of which there are a lot, would take rifles and go against the Soviet regime.

176.             Mountains. Troitskosavsk. Pre‐election meetings scheduled in four districts of the city were disrupted due to poor notification by the city council. 10‐12 people came to the meeting. For the same reason, a meeting was not held in the Alar aimag in the Altarik ulus of the Unginsky khoshun.

177.             Alar aimag. He sat down. Shastishak (Russian). Among the poor peasants, farm laborers and women, no preparatory work was carried out for the re‐election of the village council. There was also no preparatory work in the Alat buluk (Buryat).

Aimispolkom sent to the electoral committee of the Kutulik Volost. theses for the report at the elective meetings only after the elections in the parish were held by 50%.

Due to the late expulsion of the summons by the Unginsk

Hoshizbirkomissia, the village councils did not have the opportunity to fill them out in time and distribute them to the population. The Kutulik VIC did not send out summons to the village councils at all.

In Bokhansky aimak, due to untimely delivery of the summons, an elective meeting in the Serebryakovsky precinct was disrupted.

178.             Alar aimag. At the re‐election meeting at the Buryat (Russians) precinct, during the consideration of the list of candidates nominated by the cell of the All‐Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) and consisting only of one‐party member, the middle peasant spoke up with a challenge to some candidates, pointing out the need to include nonparty people in the list. The meeting supported the speaker and challenged several persons. The pre‐election meeting of the Gorny Volyn village council (Russian) took two candidates to the village council of the members of the CPSU (b), nominated by the cell (one fled during the suppression of the White Guard uprising in 1920, the other, being the chairman of the KKOV, defended the interests of the wealthy). At a meeting of citizens of the districts Zavidny, Khrebet and Zarya (Russians), the poor removed the candidacy of a member of the CPSU (b), nominated by the cell of the CPSU (b) (inactive). For communication with the kulaks, the middle peasant was assigned, exhibited by a cell of the All‐Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks at a pre‐election meeting in the Gorkhonsky Buluk (Buryats) of the Ekhirit‐Bulagat aimag. Similar withdrawals were at a meeting of the poor (Buryats) of the Nagolysko‐Aginsky aimag and at an elective meeting in the Tankhar somon164 of the Khorin aimag (three candidates nominated by the cell of the VKP (b) have been allotted, one of them is a candidate of the VKP (b).

179.             Alar aimag. At the site Slava Alarskiy Khoshun, poor man Revtov was nominated for membership in the village council at a pre‐election meeting. Dissatisfied with his promotion, the middle peasants (two people) led agitation among the population the next day, and in the evening, having invited him to their house, they beat him.

At the pre‐election meeting of the 1st precinct Tyrgetuy, after a member of the Khoshizbirkom reported on the appointment of elections, two middle peasants asked the question: ʺWhy does the Soviet government not allow the organization of peasant unions.ʺ The member of the Khoshizbirkom could not give a proper answer.

180.             Alar aimag. In with. Bazhay (Russian) kulak Chernov, in contrast to the pre‐election meeting of the poor peasants planned by the VKP (b) cell, arranged a lottery. 30 people came to the meeting, 70 to the lottery.

The latter were drunk with their fists with vodka.

Alzo‐Higinsky buluk. The ʺlishenʺ, a former guard, says: ʺSoon we will be masters of the situation, soon this power will be crushed.ʺ

The kulak of the ulus Nukhut Bulut buluk, which kept a mill and was therefore deprived of voting rights, is campaigning among the ʺdisenfranchisedʺ for refusal to fulfill orders and pay agricultural tax.

181.             Aginsky aimak. At a general meeting of the poor in the Typkisyl ulus (Buryat), two middle peasants spoke out, defending the kulaks and nominating them for the village council.

Aginsky aimak. At the re‐election meeting of citizens of the Argalai (Buryat) section, a well‐to‐do man spoke out, calling for the unification of the poor and middle peasants with noenat ¹⁶⁵, kulaks and lamstvo.

182.             Khorinsky aimak (Russian). In with. At an election meeting, a group headed by an anti‐Soviet middle peasant was organized in Kulsk, which put forward its own list of candidates and tried to fail the list put forward by the cell of the VKP (b). A similar middle peasant group, which put up its list, organized itself at an elective meeting in the village. Sankomysk. In with. Khasurta, a group of middle peasants, with the aim of disrupting the list of the cell of the VKP (b), put up two of their lists, which included anti‐Soviet people. The group campaigned for the lists, mainly among women, with the help of whom it carried out five of its candidates (3 of them women) to the village council, in addition to the list of the VKP (b) cell.

183.             In p. Kulsk (Russian) at the re‐election meeting, the middle peasant spoke out, protesting against the nomination of the list of candidates to the village council by the VKP (b) cell.

In the Nogai somon (Buryat) at an election meeting, the prosperous Valdan, in contrast to the list of the Komsomol cell, put up his list of wealthy, speculators and an insignificant part of the middle peasants (passed the Komsomol list).

184.             Bokhan aimak. Deputy The chairman of the N.‐Voskresensk village council did not include 59 merchants, former bandits, former prison guards, etc.

185.             Oirotia.  Chemal aimak. The malicious speculator Sabin got into the structure of the Yaboganskiy sellezbirkom.

A member of the Konur agricultural election committee, Kopylov, concealed from the deprivation of election rights of fellow villagersnachetchiks and gave false information about the exploiter, about the middle‐peasant activist (Altai) Kudenev, who was then deprived of election rights.

Kulak Tagachkov, the former commander of the gang, are not deprived of the voting rights by the Beshpeltirskaya agricultural election commission. Aim [Akskiy] by the electoral committee left the statement of the secretary of the Ay [Makskiy] committee [ite] ta Komsomol about the incorrect provision of electoral rights without any consequences.

186.             Assumption aimag. Pos. Govorovsky Kyskinsky village council. At the meeting of the poor, it was revealed that the majority of the poor look at work in the village council as enslavement, associated with the loss of working time, going to meetings 8‐16 miles away and doing work on the village council. Poor people propose to distribute ʺbondageʺ in the order of the queue. On this basis, the candidates who were nominated last year, members of the village council, refused to reelect. Similar sentiments were revealed at the poor meeting in the village. Manzherok, where the peasants said that ʺif we elect the poor to the village council, their already poor economy will be completely ruined.ʺ

187.             Ust‐Kan aimak. S. Turdal. At the poor meeting, during the discussion of the list of candidates for the village council (nominated by the cell of the VKP), antagonism between the old residents and the new settlers emerged. No representative of the new settlers was nominated on the lists. The latterʹs attempt to deceive their candidates was unsuccessful. In this regard, the new settlers, expressing their dissatisfaction with the party ʺimposing candidatesʺ, filed a collective statement ‐ a complaint from the Aimizbirk Commission, in which, pointing to the oppression of the old residents, they ask to attach at least one new settler to the village council.

188.             Kosh‐Agach aimag. During the election campaign, two groups were organized in the aimag. One group from the well‐to‐do Kyrgyz society, headed by a member of the presidium of the Aim Executive Committee. Another group consists of local nationals ʺTelengitʺ (party members), is in contact with the top of the wealthy ʺTelengitʺ and uses them for agitation. The first group seeks to bring its leader back to the village council, who is on trial for hiding objects of taxation. The second group led through Bai Alcohol, who enjoys authority among the Telengit, agitation against the AIK chairman. The basis for this agitation is the national antagonism between the two‐party cells existing in KoshAgach (one ‐ employees, the other ‐ local nationals).

189.             Shebalinsky aimak. In with. V. Karasuk between the poor, on the one hand, and the middle peasants and the well‐to‐do, headed by the current chairman, on the other, a struggle broke out in connection with the re‐elections to the Soviet. At the pre‐election meeting, the middle peasants and the wealthy, who were in the majority, defended the chairman of the village council (wealthy), who worked to the detriment of the poor, and introduced only two poor peasants to the new village council. At the same meeting, the chairman of the village council suggested leaving the secretary of the Komsomol cell, who pointed out abnormalities in his work. During the re‐election, thanks to agitation and the dominance of the wealthy and despite the protests of the poor, the chairman of the village council was re‐elected. The Komsomol members who were most actively opposed to the candidacy of the chairman were subsequently beaten.

190.             In p. Verkhny Karasuk was re‐elected as chairman of the village council, the well‐to‐do Tabakeev, who was under the influence of the priest.

Two former bandits were elected as members of the new composition of the Shebalinsky village council of the Shebalinsky aimag and the Chekyr village council of the Ust‐Kansky aimag.

191.             Khakass District.  Of 19,218 voters, 1,469 (7%) were deprived of their electoral rights, compared to 252 who were deprived of their voting rights last year. The bulk of the deprived (more than one third) falls on the share of dependents.

192.             Bogradskiy district. In with. Bograd at a meeting of a poor man spoke out and said: “It is in no way possible to work in a village council with a small farm. If you work, you will lose the latter, so you need to choose the wealthy in the village council. Another poor man withdrew his candidacy on the same basis. A similar speech by the poor was noted at the pre‐election meeting in V. Matur ulus (Tashtyp district) and at the meeting of the poor and middle peasants in the village. Podsinka (Markovsky district), where the speakers pointed out the impossibility of the poor, elected as chairmen of the village council, to exist on a 12‐ruble salary and, expressing dissatisfaction with the authorities, demanded equalization of the salaries of responsible workers and workers of the village councils by ʺabolishing the privileges of the working class.

193.             Chebakovsky district. At the re‐election meeting before the voting of candidates for the Council (nominated by the Komsomol cell and the poor and approved earlier at the pre‐election meeting), the well‐to‐do campaigned against them and, with the support of some of the middle peasants, failed the list. The wealthy entered the Council.

Tashtyp district. In the village. Imek at an elective meeting, the kulaks, supported by the middle peasants, brought the old chairman to the Council, who was sharply opposed by the poor.

194.             Kalmyk region.  M. Derbetovsky ulus. Re‐emigrant Bazyrov was appointed chairman of the Bankhural Aimizbirkom, former Zaisang Kachaev was elected as a member of the Tsagan‐Nur Aimizbirkom (currently both have been removed and deprived of their electoral rights). The Umantsevsky Selizbirk consisted in the majority of kulaks.

In the ulus, the Aimizbirkomissi did not deprive the electoral rights of up to 200 people (re‐emigrants and former bandits, etc.) subject to deprivation, and only after the UCP (b) Ukom took appropriate measures, those were included by the UElection Commission in the lists of ʺdisenfranchisedʺ

195.             Khosheutovsky ulus. The Uizbirkom reinstated three former merchants in the elections. In Yandyko‐Mochazhny ulus, the former Zaisang, having received positive reviews from the party cell, was reinstated in the election by the regional election commission (now it is again deprived of its vote).

196.             Erketeneevsky ulus. A large cattle breeder, deprived of election rights, as having three hired workers, achieved his restoration in rights by a fictitious division of his farm into three families, with one worker assigned to each.

Nazantagonism

197.             Buryat‐Mongolia.  Alar aimag. An instructor from Burselkredit (Buryats) arrived in the Alat‐Alar khoshun ulus for the re‐election of the Alat agricultural credit partnership. On the appointed day, the general meeting was attended by members‐shareholders in sufficient numbers for re‐elections. Having held the audience from 12 oʹclock. up to 7 oʹclock. evenings, the board postponed the re‐election to the next day. Russian shareholder members, expressing strong dissatisfaction, said that the meeting had been postponed in order to remove from the re‐election the Russians who could not stay until the next day. During the re‐election (Russians were absent), three Buryats were included in the board, and one Russian and two Buryats (kulaks) were included in the Revolutionary Commission.

198.             Alar aimag. Site Zalman Bulut buluk (Russian). At the pre‐election meeting, the poor, dissatisfied with the fact that the Buryats have more forest and hayfields compared to the Zalmanovites, speaking, they said: ʺWe, Russians, being in Buryatia, always use the worst lands.ʺ Similar speeches were at an elective meeting in the village ¹⁶⁶ Altarik, where the speakers also complained about the poor organization of school affairs among the Russian population (“Buryats pay attention only to their uluses, forgetting us, Russians, in their Buryatia”),

199.             Bokhan aimak. Poor s. Yanguty Osipovskaya vol., Speaking at the pre‐election meeting, said: “During the Russian‐German war, when we were at war, the Buryats were making money at that time. It was the same when we defended Soviet power during the civil war. Now they live like landowners and sell hayfields to the Russians at high prices. ʺ

200.             Mountains. Verkhneudinsk. In connection with the ongoing Buryatization of the Soviet apparatus, the antagonism between Russian employees and the Buryats is increasing. Russians express dissatisfaction with trade unions that allow replacement of employees, scold the Buryats and complain about the unfair treatment of the rebels against the generals, whom the Buryats supported. The worker of the Lesmukzavod said: ʺIf I am fired and the Buryats take my place, then I will kill this Buryat first of all, and there they do whatever they want to me.ʺ

201.             Oirotia. Uspensky aimak. In with. Pospaula, under the influence of the agitation of the former pre‐village council and several anti‐Soviet persons, the Altai population (130 houses), which has a common land with the Russians (70 houses), seeks to secede. At a general meeting, during the consideration of the issue of cutting the land, the Altai demanded to allocate land to them separately. In connection with the refusal of the Russians, the question was temporarily left open. A similar situation is in the Kebzen zemsovosti (Lebedsky aimak), where prosperous Altaians are campaigning for separation. In with. Artubash (the same aimak) the Altai insisted on their own and separated from the Russians.

Secretary of INFO ABOUT GPU  ¹

¹ Kuchsrovʹs signature is crossed out in ink