First published in 1925 in Lenin Miscellany IV.
Sent from London to Geneva.
Printed from the original.
Source: Lenin Collected Works, Progress Publishers, , Moscow, Volume 43, pages 103b-105a.
Translated: Martin Parker and Bernard Isaacs
Transcription\Markup: R. Cymbala
Public Domain: Lenin Internet Archive (2005). You may freely copy, distribute, display and perform this work; as well as make derivative and commercial works. Please credit “Marxists Internet Archive” as your source. • README
Dear G. V.,
Please pass on the enclosed letter to Lyubov Isakovna; she gave me your address. The letter is very urgent and important, and if she is not there, send it on at once, but read it first yourself. The point is that there has been a delay with materials about the Rostov strike, and we must hurry with the pamphlet. If the people from Rostov are in Geneva, please help to hurry them up.
The feuilleton for No. 31 has been set up in type and the proofs sent to you. If you have important corrections, send them in immediately.
How is the pamphlet coming along? How long will it be approximately and when do you expect to finish it? We should have at least a rough idea so as to know what to do about the printing.
And what about the continuation of the article “The Proletariat and the Peasantry”? Will you finish it with one more feuilleton? Can you send it in for No. 32? (If not, we shall probably have to print “The Problems of the Day” sent by Julius, also against the Socialist-Revolutionaries, specifically concerning the editorial in Revolutsionnaya Rossiya No. 14, and likewise scheduled for several issues. Because of this it would be very much in place to finish your article first.) Reply as soon as you can.
How was your lecture on the seventh? How are things with Zhizn? Bonch-Bruyevich sent me the materials—some of them were chosen for No. 31. He also wrote about transport: in this respect, just as I thought, they have practically no thing. As regards the money and the printing shop, we ought to try to get from them some concrete tokens of their abstract goodwill towards us. Incidentally, did you write L. G—ch (he is in Paris now) about the vote for the Benches in the League?
P.S. I should like to have your advice about my lectures (on the agrarian question) in the higher school in Paris. They have invited me and I have given my consent, but ... the crowd there (Chernov, Filippov, Tugan). On the other hand, “ours” write me from Paris: the “crowd” is not your concern, and that as a counterweight it is extremely important to speak there too. What do you think?
 See present edition, Vol. 34, p. 123.—Ed.