Ekho, No. 2, June 23, 1906.
Published according to the Ekho text.
Source: Lenin Collected Works, Progress Publishers, 1965, Moscow, Volume 11, pages 48-49.
Transcription\Markup: R. Cymbala
Public Domain: Lenin Internet Archive (2004). 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
Yesterday we published newspaper reports about the contemplated formation of a Cabinet consisting of Yermolov, Urusov, Nabokov, Heyden and others. Commenting on this list today, Rech says: “Evidently, the compilers of this list included members of the Constitutional-Democratic Party only tentatively; actually, the Constitutional-Democratic Party will take no part in a Cabinet of this character.”
That is all very well, gentlemen of the Cadet Party I But how does Rech know that the Constitutional-Democratic Party will take no part in such a Cabinet?
The reader will ask: What do you mean by “how does Rech know”? Is not Rech the chief organ of the Cadets? Quite right. But in putting that question we wanted to suggest that it is unbecoming, in the highest degree unbecoming, for a party like the Constitutional-Democratic Party, which has held congresses legally, predominates in the State Duma, and is a wealthy, “enlightened” and liberal-minded party, to play hide-and-seek. Is it not high time it was said that Rech is the official and chief organ of that party? Is it not high time that the resolutions of the Central Committee of the Cadet Party were published? One of two things, gentlemen: Either your party has not officially discussed the question of the kind of Cabinet it will “take part in In that case you should say so plainly. In that case, Rech should speak on its own behalf, and not on behalf of the Constitutional-Democratic Party, that is: “We are sure that the Constitutional-Democratic Party will not take part”, etc.
Or your party has officially discussed this question. In that case you should publish the minutes of that discussion, otherwise your silence proves that you are conducting secret negotiations behind the backs of the people.
“Today a more homogeneous list is being discussed,” says Rech further, quoting only the names of Yermolov, Timiryazev, Heyden and Stakhovich, that is to say, bureaucrats and Octobrists, but no Cadets. Thus, negotiations have taken place. The Cadets were asked—perhaps through the medium of the “Centre Party” in the Council of State—will you take part in such a Cabinet? The Cadets answered: No, we will not.
Is that what happened, gentlemen? Have there been negotiations, or not? Did you state your terms, or not? Did your terms refer exclusively to the appointment of definite persons to the Cabinet, or did they also stipulate a complete amnesty, guaranteed liberties, abolition of the Council of State, and universal suffrage?
Until the Constitutional-Democratic Party officially gives full and absolutely precise answers to these questions we shall not tire of repeating to the people: Citizens, beware! Members of the party of “people’s freedom” are conducting “unofficial” negotiations behind the backs of the people with a view to selling the people’s freedom at a bargain price.
 See pp. 38-39 of this volume.—Ed.