The Daily Worker Newspaper, December 11, 1930, Page 13

-@ & 6 bee” & -* _ © B's 82 @ ean a 2 iy RO eee - ie oe Tchayanov group and this was also an argu- ment in favor of a bloc with this group. 8. A session of the Central Committee in the spring of 1927 in the building of the Supreme Economic Council. The following were present: Paltchinsky, Chrennikoy, Ra- binovitch, Fyedotov, Laritchev, Krassovski and Tcharnovsky, Questions of the work in the textile industry were discussed. It was decided to work to hamper the development of the textile industry, to hinder the build- ing of new factories; to cause an insufficient utilization of existing capital investments, to hamper the’ introduction of new textiles and to create a disproportion between the half- manufactured goods. Krassovsky sketched the main lines of the work with regard to the Peopie’s Commissariat for Transport: to cause an insufficient utilization of the rolling stock and in particular, of the locomotives, and further, to slow down the development of the carrying capacity of the main lines to hamper the development of water. transport and the fleet working on oil fuel. Paltchin- sky reported on the desirability of establish- ing connections with the “R U L” group abroad, and Rabinovitch reported the exist- ence of connections with Vorshantchik and the Polish government. 9. A session of the Central Committee in the building of the Plan Economic Commis- sion. The following: were present: Tcharnov- sky and Ramsin. The session listened to Tcharnoysky, Ramsin. The session listened to | Rebinovitch’s report on the mining industry which sketched the plannec hampering of investments, the hampering of housing, the hindering of scientific research work and of the electrical work in the Dcnetz Basin. In a report delivered by Strichov the plans were sketched for the work in the petroleum industry; the impeding of production, the delzying of the experimental boring opera- tions, and individual delays with regard to the cracking plant with a view to reducing the export of benzine. In accordance with a report of Ramsin on the power industry, plans were adopted for the causing of crises ~ in the supply of electricity at the most im- portant points: the Donetz Basin, Leningrad, Moscow, Kisel, and the Kusnitz Basin: the DAILY WORKER, NEW YORK, THURSDAY, DECEMBER 11, 1930 Chrennikoy, Ramsin, Fyedotoy and Tchar- novsky attending; the second in the spring in the building of the State Plan Economic Commission, -Chrennikoy, Kalinnikoy, Larit- chev, Fyedotov, Ramsin- and Paltchinsky at- tending, and the third also in the building of the State Plan Economic Commission, Chrennikoy, Paltchinsky, Ramsin, Laritchev, Fyedotov and Kalinnikov, dealt just with this question, e These three later conferences also dealt with the following questions: the report of Paltchinsky that, according to his informa- tion from abroad they might reckon on an intervention within two years, in 1930, and that it would be necessary for them to carry on their work in such a fashion that a gen- eral crisis could be brought about to coin- cide with the intervention. It was reported that France would be the leader of the in- tervention, that Russian industrialists had conferred with Briand and Poincare, and that the military leader of the intervention | would be General Lukomsky. At the same time the candidates for the various minis- terial posts after the counter-revolutionary coup d’etat were discussed. At the next ses- sion the question of these candidates was again discussed. The new methods of sab- otage were discussed. These consisted in |making capital sterile by placing it in long- term and expensive building operations. And finally, at the fifth session of this period, ‘the bloc with the Kondratyev-Tchayanoy eee ————eeeeeeeoeeee—————eeeooee—E—E—E—ET—T—T—T—T—T—q&q>—*_—*—€X2{][]H=_EOEOE_"§ donment of the work of the Central Com- mittee, owing to other reasons. THe state- ments of Ramsin on the 16th of October con- tain the following: “A second and not less powerful spur was the assurance conveyed by Laritchev and Ramsin at the end of 1928 from the Trade and Industrial Committee that there was firm hope of an intervention in 1930, i. e., in a short space of time. The fractional struggle which flared up in the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, the development of great difficulties in the collectivization, the progressive economic crisis, the growing discontent of the broad masses, the speedy growth of the hold of the T. K. P. (Kondra- tyev’s group) on the masses and the financ- ing of the Industrial Party by the Russian emigrants, all these facts formed the basis of the calculations for the success of a coun- ter-revolutionary coup d’etat which was the next task of the Industrial Party. “Under such circumstances the activity of the Industrial Party was, of course, continued, but noticeably reduced. The chief task here was the preservation and careful increase of the cadre of the Industrial Party, the con- solidation of the tactical relations with the T. K. P. and the efforts to maintain the organization until the time of the interven- tion.” (Statement of 16th of October, 1930.) The new destruction of the Central Com- mittee took place'in the spring of 1930 with the arrest of Fyedotov and Laritchey. But a ge oi te ; _ CO-OPERATIVE FARMING | ConsPiRaTor non-rational planning of electrical power | works, a demand for foreign machinery and delays in the dates fixed in the building of power stations. oh his was the work of the sabotagers’ or- ga: vation in the year 1927. group was discussed as the main question.) this also’ did not lead to the stopping of, the activity of the Industrial Party as Ram-, | ‘The questions of the intervention began ; to mix themselves with the questions of sab- | otage in this period. In fact, the latter ques- tions were even subordinated to the former An analysis of these sessions proves that in | Without, odetia the former questions. as- the whole of 1927 up to the final crystaliza- |SWming overwhelming importance tion of the Industrial Party, the questions of In the second half of 1928 a decisive change sabotage work, which occupied the most im-|took place in the work of the Central Com- portant place in the work of the Central} mittee. The arrest of Paltchinsky, Chrenni- Committee, were chiefly concerned with re-|koy, Krasovsky, and Strichov, following on tarding the constructive work. The inter-|the arrest of Rabinovitch, robbed the first vention was regarded without any correspond- | Central Committee of the Industrial Party of ing concretization and working out of the} its leaders and caused a temporary interrup- Peans. tion of its work. In consequence it was the ee en end of 1928 before another session was held. re ea > i 1927 the first meeting took place between Ramsin and Riabushinsky and the first establishment of connections with the French general staff. This meeting in- creased and consolidated the connections with the Trade and Industrial Committee and the working methods and aims. Laritchev, Fyedotov, Tcharnovsky and Ram- sin took part and it was decided to continue the work and to organize a new Central Committee. The above mentioned journeys abroad of Ramsin and Laritchev took place at this period, and the negotiations with the Trade and Industrial Committee and with The Character of the Work of the French military circles. From this moment Central Committee of the Industrial Zariy in the Years 1928-29. with the general alterations of the political on the questions of intervention were placed definitely into the foreground and the whole work took its alignment from them, Ramsin declares that in the spring of 1929 a session ‘vuation altered in 1928 in accordance! of the new Central Committee took place, Fyedotov, Ramsin, Tcharnoysky, Laritchey, Pas ein. the ‘wiilding ‘2 Whieineeis in the Spviet Ualon, Fal ci.<umstances spoken of above. -ui the first half of 1928 the sabotage ac- ti\.cy of the Central Committee was of an ff , r s elementary character. The session of the Our chief task is now to maintain our- Central Committee in winter took place in selves until the beginning of the interven- the building of the Supreme Economic Coun- | tion; our main tactic must therefore be di- cil, and the following took part: Paltchinsky, rected to preserving the head of the Tndus- Chrennikov, Tcharnoysky, Kalinnikoy, Larit-| ‘Tialist Party and its cadres, even if this chey and Ramsin. Paltchinsky and Ramsin is purchased, at the price of a weakening of resorted on the instructions they had re= | the leadership of the various branches of ce.ved fyom abroad and informed the session ie ae eon! hs See. Pdr Sin ourepertes, table, hand Bean approred, has already begun and will inevitably deepen - -t :nust be pointed out that the arrest of | of its own accord. Therefore, the work must the Schachty group which took place in the| be carried on with a maximum amount of first months of 1928 did not restrain the] care. With this end in view the former tac- Sabctagers in their work. On the contrary, | tics of the minimal plans shall be abandoned just at that time the question of turning the absolutely, because they are impossible of Central Committee into a political party R? pat be and Kalinnikoy attending. The following de- cision was arrived at: sin seeks to prove in his statement of the | 21st of September: “I cannot remember any further session ;of the Central Committee Industrial Party | throughout the following period, Up to the ,last destruction of the organization by the arrest of Fyedotov and Laritchev, I came into touch only with individual members of the Central Committee or with small groups.” The Criminal Activity of the Central Committee of the Industrial Party in the Year 1930. This contention of Ramsin is refuted by a series of statements made by others of the accused, concerning plenary sessions in the years 1929-1930. For instance, Kalinnikov declares (on the 3ist of October, 1930): “The Central Committee of the Industrial Party organized two conferences on its own initiative: one to receive the report of Gintz- burg on the economics of industry in 1930. (Sokolovsky, Byelozerkoysky, Schein.*) Tchar- novsky, Laritschev and myself were present. The session took place under the chairman- ship of Schein and in his room in the Scien- tific-Technical Institute of the Supreme Eco- nomic Council. The second conference was held in the building of the State Plan Eco- nomic Commission in Laritchey’s room, in order to hear the report of Gromann on the general economic trend of 1930. I did not attend this second conference and can- not say who was there. “With regard to the estimation of the eco- nomic situation to be expected for 1930 these conferences came to very similar conclusions, namely that productién and investments in building would experience great difficulty with regard to the supply of fundamental raw materials and building material, and chiefly with regard to finances and the sup- ply of food. This analysis of the economic was considered. According to Ramsin, the | 2°¢o™Plishment and obviously dangerous, and | trends of. 1930 was not unexpected, for the arvest,of a number of members“of the Cen-|in this connection, to review our plans if tral Committee “had no influence on the|this be possible without risk. The work of activity of the latter.” “In connection with | the most prominent members of the organi- the arrest of Rabinovitch it was ak 4 4 out as kee oe y rs s% _ © 12cbe Ther Seésions, Of which the first 43% 3 results ‘Will be of value to the future State.” Pe 1) @ation: ds» to -be ,transferred to the: field of | difficulties are ito 5 OED edd Fc ts Fa igs, hs'their | mer Of 98K” 4 | tion | Statements of the, 2st: of September, 1990) stystoetng- amide: the Central Committee of the Industrial Party as its members*were already aware of these circumstances at ‘the ‘time the Five-Year Plan. was-drawn up. “Still greater economic pe expected for, the sum- 13 ak * > at Rwits eg. e ry “tie pe! “The acc: ity oF nis_ named. here Page Nme Kalinnikov goes on: “|. , Laritchev postponed the information of K ... until the next session of the Cene tral Committee of the Industrial Party at the beginning of January, 1930, at. which Ramsin, Laritchev, Tcharnoysky and I were present.” “At this session the C. C. of the Industrial Party adopted the resolution on the inter- vention. This was done at the proposal of Ramsin. It was decided to begin with the work of organizing military groups of mem- bers of the Industrial Party in the institue tions of the Red Army.” Fyedatov declares on the 30th of October, 1930: “At the end of 1929 I met Tcharnovsky at his request in the Scientific-Technical Ins stitute and had a long talk with him, is | “Above all, he informed me that the S.1.0, (Union of Engineer Organizations) continued to exist despite the arrests, and was trans- forming itself into an Industrial Party of {which Ramsin was chairman, whilst the meme bers of the Central Committee of the party. i were Tcharnovsky, Laritcheyv, Kalinnikoy and |Fyedotov. I expressed astonishment at the fact that I had been elected a member of the Central Committee without my ag7se- }ment, but he calmed me by declaring that {the Bureau of the Central Committee had ‘never_once met and that now, in view of te necessity for greater care, would not meet it had therefore been decided that the Bue au should do nothing.” The investigation material gives exact ine “rmation concerning another side of the ace ty of the accused, namely concerning an ‘aordinary session of the C, C, of the In- ial Party in May, 1930. This session was ( particularly secret and this was the ‘on why Ramsin, Kalinnikov, Tcharnov- , Fyedotovy and Laritchey, who were ale cody arrested at that time, said nothing bout it in their first statements (March, -\pril, 1930). Under the influence of these statements Ramsin had to admit that he had not told ihe whole truth on the 2ist of September. she motives for his attitude are quite unders standable. It is sufficient to look at the agenda of the session in this period. Finally, on the 3rd of Noyember, Ramsin Ceclared the following. After all, he supple mented his statements concerning the year i928 with a series of conferentes in which the new members of the C, C, took part, and which dealt chiefly with the reports of Rame sin and Laritchev concerning their journey to Paris in the autumn of 1928 and with the carrying out of the instructions which the two had received in conferences with c0-0p- erators of the French general staff after personal relations had been established with agents of the French secret service in Mose \ cow. As far as the year 1929 is concerned, the ‘following was decided upon in the five conferences which Ramsin now admits: In the first conference Ramsin and Lare. itchev reported on the intervention on the basis of information which they had received from French agents in Moscow. It was stressed that the intervention would take place in 1930 and that it was necessary to have caused an economic crisis by that time, -A discussion took place on the methods of Joint action with the counter-revolutionary Kondratyev-Tchayanoy group, the methods necessary to aggravate the food crisis in the summer of 1930, and the methods for the organization of peasant uprisings, At the second conference Ramsin reported on the persistent demands of the agents of the French secret service and of the French general staff that the work for the formas tion of military groups in the Red Army ; Should be accelerated. The Industrial Party was instructed to make the necessary ins quiries. The third conference discussed the ques- tion of the formation of an organization for carrying out diversions, In accordance with the special instructions of the French gene eral staff the members of the Central Com- mittee were acquainted with the tasks they were expected to perform with regard to the powr industry, the war industries, the raile way system, etc. i At the fourth session it was reported that the date of the intervention had been poste poned until 1931. . 4 2 “In the final session a report was made cons. __ the crea’ coup d'etat was decided upon, - e ~<a my ~~ ~ , of a military.organizas — np compotion of the goad /#) ohitionary ) ‘Stib}¢06 48 @ special in-*- In. this way-the whole work iof the saboin oui aa,