The Daily Worker Newspaper, December 11, 1930, Page 9

, * ruphions in ‘the food supplies for the popula- tion, afc.” ,.. ; tt the end of 4927,” states Fyedotov, “{ had a conversation with Engineer Chren- ikaw on tthe same subject, and he pointed out that the work of preparation was net bemg carried on rapidly eneugh, tat none of the ‘expected symptoms ef discontent were observable, and that the Trade and Indus- trial Committee requested more energetic work, since ‘the intervention was possible in 191-82, or even earlier, in 1930-31. ‘Lhe or- ders of ‘the “Trade and Industrial Committee were passed .on to Ramzin, who at that time had gust returned from abroad. “J (informed ‘the leading group of the tex- tile jindustry: Kupriyanoy, Kirpetenke, Der- shavin, and Nolde** of this communication.” In ‘this manner the réactionary forces of the engineers, intent on sabotage, assumed a-more and more concrete form, and consoli- dated their contact with the erganization of the Russian bourgeois industrialists. abroad, in proportion as the work of sociai- dist-construction became increasingly success - ful in the Soviet Union. The scattered and isolated connections among the different branches of industry were replaced by the organized united front of the former capitai- ists and ‘technical experts of the industries. of the Union. The final consolidation, shap- ing, and detailed organization of this front was ‘the object of the joint work in 1928 for the preparation of the intervention. Tite ‘Final Consolidation of the Organiza- tional Connections Between the Sabotagers and the ‘Trade and Industrial Committee and the Regulation of the Joint Werk. jm October, 1928, two of the members of the Central Committee of the Industrial Party. Ramzin and Larichev, entered into communication with P. P. Ryabuchinsky, and organized a joint conference with the lead- ing centre of the Trade and Industrial Com- mittee. ‘Those taking part in this conference, which ‘took place in Paris, were: “The president of the Trade and Indus- trial ‘Committee, Denisov, P. P. Ryabuchin- sky, Nobel, Gusakov, Starinkevitch, Metcher- sky, Daritchey, and I. Ramzin.” (Statement made by Ramzin on September 21, 1930.) Without disclosing in his statements the whale contents of this important conference, Ramzin declared: “ ... After Laritchey and I had given our reports .on the general situation, we dis- cussed in detail the growing activities of the, Industrial Party, and its increased influence’ over the masses of the engineers, but em- phasized at the same time the dangers of the work, pow so “tly enhanced, as evid-_ enced -by the arrest of a number of mem- bers .of the Industrial Party. Laritchey de- scribed the situation in the oil industry in somewhat greater detail. The represemtative of the ‘Trade and Industrial Commtittee ap-_ proved in general the direction and tempo of the work of the Industrial Party and pointed out that now our main efforts should’ be directed ‘towards maintaining the leading; nucleus, ‘the work being continued the while as far as possible in accordance with the earlier directives, the tactics te be altered as required by the conditions of the moment. At‘the same time the members of the ‘Trade and Industrial Committee informed as that they thad already achieved considerable suc- cess with ‘the French and English govern- ments, that France would probably ‘take’! over ‘the general leadership of the interven- tion, that Poland and Rumania, with the aid of the Baltic States, would take over the »military operations, and that we must adjust ourselves to expecting the intervention in 2930, or at latest in. 1981. “Further, ‘the financial questions were reg-' ulated: ‘The sum of one million, in round figures, yearly was agreed upon. This was ‘to be ‘brought ‘by —— to Laritchey at his ‘house,’ or in ‘his absence to me/ “In the evening there was a meeting ef an unofficial character attended by Laritchev,' mysélf, and the members of the Trade and Industrial Committee, in the private room) of a restaurant on ome of the large ‘boule- vards:” In this manner the finel contact was es- tablished between thes> two organizations, and wthe financing -pioced on a -fivm basis. At ‘the same ‘time the chanvels of communi-: catien were ‘finally settied, and were then! made use of ‘by the saveiagers. These chan- neis served later for offer work in connec- “ss tion with the tasks of preparation for -the . intervention, - Ramain, in his statement of September 21, clearly states the role alloted to cach of the, jo ave ac- thde industry + “impotent: - > and cused of saboines in the t They are to be tricd separately ‘of the intervention: he said that this ques-' | in defendants when takiag over the money: “Estimated distribution of the moneys in: the period from the end of 1928 4ill the spring of 1930: Oil industry, through Larit-: chev, approximately 100,000 reubles; coal: minigg through ‘Laritchey, about 150;000; roubles; peat cutting, through lLaritchev, about 50,000 roubles; forestry, through Larit-. chevy, about 50,000 roubles; metal industry, through Hartmann and Charnovsky, about 300,000 roubles; textile industry, through Fye- dotoy and Kupriyanov, about 200,000 roubles; miscellaneous, threugh Kalinnikev, about. 300,000 roubles;; transport, through Larit- chev, about 300,000 roubles; :power supply through Vaschkoy and Kamenetzky, about 100,009 roubles; economic group, through La- ritchey and Kalinnikov, abeut 50,000 roubles; total: 1,600,000 roubles.” : Ramzin and Laritchev at once informed their accomplices in Moscow as to the gen- eral political adjustment, and also with -re-! gard te the methods of future work and the remittance of money, Ramzin, in his statement of October 16, 1930, gives a detailed description of this aneeting in Paris, the date of which he gives. as between October 5 and 10, 1928. He gives the same names—Denisevy, Nobel, Gusakov,’ and Ryabuchin-. Mechersky, Starinkevitch, sky, adding that of Konovalov, and his.state- ment shows that tt conference was more definite in character than indicated in his. first statements. With respect to the intervention cuestion, Ramain cieelares: “... At this session Denisov infermed us that the tion niust be divided inte two parts: pre- parations abroad and preparations in the Soviet Union. The first part of the work, that is, the diplomatic negotiations with the governments, the “saancing ef the inter- vention and the organization of its military forces, was taken over by the Trade and Indus‘rial Cominittee, whu.. .. was the duty of the Industrial Party to devote itself to jthe inner preparation for the intervention in the country itself, by means of bringing about and aggravating ecenemic crises, and aiding the intervention from within. The Trade and Industrial Committee had already secured the support of France and England in this question. France was taking over the chiet leadership of the intervention, and cal- culated on the military forces of Poland, Rumania and the Baltic States, whilst Eng- land would aid the intervention with its fleet. The most favorable moment for the summer of 1930 agreed on this), term. Therefore, the whole ef the work of! the engineering centre was to be concen-- trated on the full development of ‘the crisis in 1930.” Strictly speaking, this was therefore a con- ference on the time and means toe be chosen (Laritchevy and I were mentioned as having taken place in a res- taurant in one of the boulevards. Ramzin’s statement continues: . At the subsequent meeting (attended by Laritchev and myself) in the evening of vards, there were present Denisov, Nobel, taney. I conversed chiefly with Denisov. Denisov said that they were quite convinced, of the success of the intervention for this time it was an intervention with a solid foun-; dation, both from the military side and from the side of supplies, and fermer errors would. not be repeated. I remember that Tretyakov observed that if use were made of the troops. of Poland, Rumania, the Baltic states, and the | Wrangel army—numbering about 100,000 men | {—the intervention would have a magnifi- | cently equipped army at its disposal: that in* the opinion of many former industrialists, ' given suppert from the sea side in ‘the North and the South, suceess could ‘be ensured with even a small army of 600,000 to 800,000 men, | and that here a combined and simultaneous! attack on Moscow was regarded as offering ‘best prospect of success. Denisov gave no’ clear reply to my question on the financing | tion was of course not yet completely settled. | I gathered from what’ Denisov and Nobel said: that the means forthe 4ntervention were] to be raised -in cil industrial etreles, es-" pecially’ from Deterding; from “the” wrench + spat was Befablisted Af tiie | and English governments, and in ‘pot from | the former Russian industrialists .. / Laritehev's statement differs ontnindins, 4 DAILY WORKER, NEW YORK, THURSDAY, DECEMBER 1 Esc aoe ee EE ES ee a {the information given by Rarazin. whole of the work for the interven-. intervention was still considered ‘to ‘be the’ and 1931 as the very latest’ for the military intervention in the Soviet Union. ‘The conference was continued in ‘the’ evening, at the unofficial aneeting already’ the same day, in the private room .of a res-| taurant in the district, of the great \boule-| Gukasov, Metchersky, Tretyakov and Kasch-_ sent reports to the “Tirade and Industrial Cem- 1930 Laritchey said: . . In September-Octeber, 1928 Ramain’ and I were sent te the World Power Con-' ference in London. We ‘took opportunity to. visit Paris on the return journey and to con- sult with our head organization, the “I'rade and Industrial Committee. After arriving in Paris on ‘the 8th of October, 1928, and after Ramzin had -negetiated over the telephone with ‘the president of the former owners in in the ‘Trade and Industrial Committee,. Denisov invited us to his place for a con- sultation. When we arrived, a conference was held in his study, participated in, ‘be-} sides Denisov, by Rabuchinsky, Nobel, Guk- asov, and Starinkevitch. Ramzin gave a re-~- { port on the work.in our organization and en} the general measures of the sabotage ‘being carried on in the Soviet Union, showing te what extent ‘these measures were in accord- ance with the directions given by the Trade tasks of the®preparation -for the interven- tion. Special attention was devoted to the events disturbing the activities of the In- dustrial Party: the discovery of the sabotage in the Donetz district, the Shakhty affair, and ‘the discevery of the sabotage organiza- tions greatly interested the representatives of the ‘Trade end Industrial Committee (Denisov, Rabuschinsky, and others), since they threw difficulties in the way of our future work and hampered the consistent carrying out of the measures for the prep- aration of a general crisis in the country. Denisov particularly emphasized that we must now devote special attention to the metal industry, that -great disproportiens must ‘be brought about in this industry, and the effect of capital investment reduced. Nobel and Gukasov put a aumber of ques- tions to me on ‘the situation in the oil in- dustry, on the strength of the sabotage organization in this industry, and on the carrying out of acts of sabotage for retarding the erection of new plant and the develop- ment of export. ‘They pointed out that dur- ing his stay in Paris they ‘had given Strishev general instructions with regard to the work to be done in the oil industry. With regard to the general situation of the Trade and Industrial Committee and our organization, Denisov pointed out -te us that in spite of the discovery of some individual sabotage governments, and that ‘tthe question of the intervention, ‘theugh spostponed owing to a number of considerations from 1928 to 1980, had by ne means been dropped, that on the | contrary the intervention was being pre- that therefore the work of the Industrial portance. . .” ber.) This conference in Octeee>, 1928 must be. regarded as.one of dectsive importance, from. the standpoint: and Industrial Committee in every branch between the Trade and Industrial Committee and the industries had been parallel, and, isolated according to each ‘branch of industry. 2. Of the laying down of the exact future forms of this connection, and of the alloca- tion Gf the inner roles for ithe preparation hitherto equally scattered ways and means | of financing were finally settled. 3. Of the final and fundamental adjust-: ment to the idea of the intervention, and the coordination of the whole work of sabotage, with stress placed upon ‘the latter. Although the "Trade and Industrial Com- mittee had ‘kept the Centre of ‘the Engineers’ informed, by means of ‘the separate connec- October, 1928, of their intentions and plans’ with regard to ‘the intervention, and vice’ mittee on the sabotage work which it car- riéd out, and, aithiough-as Will be’ seen ‘below between Centre and the representatives of the gen-! eral staffs in France and Sngland, for the and Industrial .Cemmittee and fulfilled the’ tion in the transport service. “These ques-: organizations, we must continue our work at all costs, and maintain the organization of’ the Industrial Party. ‘Denisoy laid special stress on the statement ‘that ‘the ‘Trade and’ Industrial Committee pessessed the certain’ and firm support of the French and English pared for most energetically abroad, and. Party within the Union was of special im-| (Statement made 16th Octo- 1. Of the final laying down and coordina-, tion of the main jime of uniform work of: the sabotage organization and of the Trade: of industry, whilst ‘hitherto the connectidas) of the intervention. At the same time the. Page Five Ce a a Industrial Committec, this work did not age sume a centralized character, uniform for every branch of industry, until October, 1928, Laritchev, for instance, makes the follows ing statement with regard to the preliminary individual connections (16th October, 1930): . At the end of 1927, during the stay in Paris ef one of the active members of the -Centre of the Engineers and Techni- cians, Professor Ramzin, later president of the Central Committee of the Industrial Party, received definite instructions from the Trade and Industrial Committee, and from the French general staff, on the necessity of forcing the measures being carried on ‘by the sabotage organizations in preparation of the intervention, as also a general plan for carrying out the intervention, with statee ment of the possible time for its realization. the first term being set originally for 1928. At the same time Professor Ramzin got inte touch with . in Moscow, for the negotiae tions and the maintenance of the connects tions with foreign circles.” Among the connectio must include the meetin and Laritchev in London, the session in Paris, a few days pee at the house of the engineer A. A. Simon (Director of Vickers works), at which a certain Mr. Philip (mane ager at Vickers works) was present, and the meeting Laritchev and Ramzin had with the English colonel Lawrence: >“... Engineer A. A. Simon and Sir Philip informed us that at the moment France rep- resented the centre of the intervention preparations, and had the intention of opere ating -with the military forces of Poland, Rumania, and the Baltic states; that Enge land was joining with France in these prepe arations by helping with money, equipment, etc.; that England had also the intention of lending military assistance of the intervene tion with its fleet; that Churchill was the chief promoter of the intervention; that England was particularly interested in the Russian oil affairs, and would like to intere vene with its fleet in the Black Sea.” (Statee ment made 16th of October.) “|. . During our stay in London, that is, in September, 1928, Ramzin organized @ meeting with the well known Colonel Lawe rence at the Savoy Hotel. I was present af this meeting. The general attitude of Eng- lish military circles toward the intervention was discussed. Colonel Lawrence supported the idea in every way, and assured us ‘that English military circles too maintained @ Positive attitude towards a general particie 6 Union, and that they were working out definite measures; besides this, serious steps were being taken to paralyze the propaganda and influence of the Soviet Union in the East and in China. He did not give us any details regarding this work.” At the above-mentioned conference in Paris in October, 1928 a balance was drawn of the work of the individual connections as ntained up to that time by the members of the central committee of the Industrial Party in its own sphere with the leaders of the Trade and Industrial Committee and with the army staffs. of France and England, and a united Central was created for the future. At the same time, October, 1928 was the ‘time when ‘the Trade and Industrial Com- mittee came finally to the conviction that the intervention must be forced within the shortest possible time. The following state ments, made by Kalinnikov, are extremely important in this regard: According to Kalinikoy's statements: - - . Chrennikoy and Fyedotov, returning from their journey abroad in 1927, brought the Engineering Centre the news that the government crisis in France and England had caused the acceleration of the intervene tion to ‘be considered necessary; ‘as to the Russian ‘White-Guard circles in France, these were apparently not yet convinced of the necessity of hastening the intervention, since the Russian emigres in the Trade and Ine | dusrtial Committee were not yet willing to take over the industrial undertakings which ‘| had formerly belonged to them-—they cone sidered that after the intervention ‘these | undertakings would not yet be sufficiently mittee agreed about the end of 1927, to the “necessity of starting work in preparation of {the “intervefition. “Thé Engineering Centre’ hwas' “ixiformed’ of ‘this ‘by Chrennikov’ ahd Ramzin. . . . The information brought iby ‘Chrennikov, Fyedotoy and Ramzin was con- veyed in the autumn of 1927 to the group and deels move with the sabotoge than the purpose of preparation for ‘the intervention,’ meeting of the Engineering Centre, cons cannsefaguyramienw ones + -jentien, Lut confirms in all essentials” #uwoigh the agency of this same Trade and] sisting of: Paltchinsky, Rabinovitch, Yanwe pation in an intervention against the Soviet . | restored. Urged by the government circles ay France, the ‘Trade and Industrial Come