Mr. N. V. Savich, a member of the Zemstvo-Octobrist fraction of the Fourth Duma, spoke of the formation of the "Progressive bloc" in the Duma before the revolution. Mr. V. V. Volk-Karachevski, a People's Socialist from the Second Duma, spoke in favor of a coalition ministry. He was followed by Mr. S. I. Shidlovski, a member of the Fourth Duma, who dwelt on the effect of the "Progressive bloc" in bringing about the revolution. Mr. V. I. Dzhyubinski, a member of the Labor fraction of the Fourth Duma, spoke in favor of a coalition, as also did Mr. I. N. Efremov, a member of the Progressive fraction of the Fourth Duma. Mr. Efremov said: "To-day in a free country, there is no place for an irresponsible opposition. While criticizing the government the opposition should always be ready to assist the government in meeting the questions of the day." Mr. Efremov was followed by Mr. M. I. Skobelev, a member of the Social Democratic fraction of the Fourth Duma and one of the prominent members of the Executive Committee of the Council of Workmen's and Soldiers' Deputies, whose speech is given in full in enclosure 5.1 That part of Mr. Skobelev's speech in which he rejects the formula, "peace within the country for the sake of war at the front," is a very clear example of the fundamental attitude held by the socialists toward the war. The socialists feel that the war is of secondary importance to the revolution. They feel that the war must be brought to an end as soon as possible in order to prevent its further interference with the far more important business of the revolution. This feeling clearly emerges in the sentence in which Mr. Skobelev mentions the "difficulties that the present international situation places in the way of the revolution." To him the Great War is merely an unfortunate "international situation" whose chief significance for Russia is that it hinders the free course of the revolution. The socialists have been bitterly opposed to the war since the beginning and the first use they are making of their new freedom is to discredit the war spirit. It is in this connection that they refused to admit that the middle classes had a share in the revolution. The middle-class orators at the meeting of the Duma all spoke of the unity of the Russian people during the revolution, meaning that the middle classes desired and assisted the revolution, because, besides being desirable in general, it was desirable at that very time since the old régime was incompetent as regards the war. The socialists claim the revolution, in its entirety, for the working class and army, deny 1 Not printed. ing the share taken by the middle classes, and never mention the incompetence of the old régime with regard to the war. It seems to this Consulate that the narrowly uncompromising nature of the socialist thought is most illuminatingly shown in that part of Mr. Skobelev's speech in answer to the interruption from the floor regarding the action of the Finland Regiment in marching under arms to the Mariinski Palace where the Temporary Government was sitting. Mr. Skobelev stated, in defense of the regiment's action, that "the troops, like all citizens, are now free to move about on the streets and express their political desires." The implication from this is that the action of the regiment was blameless and not in the nature of an armed threat against the Temporary Government. That is the unofficial attitude and utterance of a very influential socialist. But the official attitude and utterance of the official organ of the socialist soldiers and workmen is to be seen in the decree of the Council of Workmen's and Soldiers' Deputies forbidding troops to issue into the streets without the order of the Executive Committee of the Council of Workmen's and Soldiers' Deputies, and the appeal to the people not to carry arms when parading, as such action is not in accordance with the principles of political liberty. Skobelev's speech is, in its entirety, absolutely typical of the present socialist psychology in Petrograd. The last speech of the day was delivered by Mr. F. I. Rodichev, a member of the Constitutional Democratic Party (the Party of the People's Freedom), who was in all four Dumas and who is now the Commissioner of the Temporary Government for Finnish Affairs. His speech aroused the greatest enthusiasm and is a passionate expression of the views of the middle classes who are solid in their support of the Temporary Government. Mr. Rodichev's speech is given in full as enclosure 6.1 Referring to former statements regarding a coalition ministry a letter of the Prime Minister, Prince G. E. Lvov, is given below as addressed to M. V. Rodzyanko (and N. S. Cheidze): In the invocation of the Temporary Government published April 26 [/May 9], it is stated among other things that the Government will renew its efforts leading towards the increase of the number of its members by summoning to responsible state work representatives of those creative and active forces of the country which heretofore have taken no direct and immediate part in the government of the state. In view of the above I addressed in the name of the Temporary Government the president of the Council of the Workmen's and Soldiers' Deputies, the member of the state Duma, N. S. Cheidze, with the request that this suggestion be brought to the attention of the Executive Committee and the party represented by the above council. 'Not printed. This brought forth the following indefinite decision from the Executive Committee: The Executive Committee of the Council of Workmen's and Soldiers' Deputies in their session of April 29 [/May 12] has after long debates, by a majority vote of 23 against 22 and 8 who have abstained from voting, decided against the timeliness of the representatives of the Executive Committee of the Deputies joining a coalition ministry. This decision is not thought to be final. The adherents of a coalition ministry are confident that the Council of Workmen's and Soldiers' Deputies will decide in favor of a coalition ministry. It is possible that, seeing the insignificant majority against the formation of a coalition ministry, the Executive Committee on their side will also revise the question. The reason a coalition ministry is inevitable is that several members of the present ministry, in view of their lack of power, and the fact that their existence depends upon the will of the Council of Workmen's and Soldiers' Deputies, will resign. Their places will be filled by members of the Council of Workmen's and Soldiers' Deputies, and it is believed two or three new ministries will be established. In view of the pending break, this will be the best solution, and it is believed the entire Temporary Government will not resign at once. This may delay the ever-present crisis. The masses want not separate peace, but an end of the war. A cessation of hostilities on the front now exists, and this state will continue. A Russian offensive should not be hoped for. The unofficial news from other districts is most disquieting. I have [etc.] [Enclosure-Extract] NORTH WINSHIP Speech of the Russian Minister of War (Guchkov) Delivered in the Duma on May 10, 1917 Look around you, lock into your own minds, and tell me whether we are not all seized with a heavy sorrow and a deathly anxiety bordering on desperation. Why has our first feeling of bright joy given place to this sorrow and anxiety? You will find the answer to this question in the manifesto of the Temporary Government (just) addressed to the people. "It is a great danger to our freedom that the growth of new social ties binding the country together does not keep pace with the disintegration caused by the fall of the old régime "-those are the careful words of the Temporary Government in describing the deathly malady which is undermining the very life of the country. Disintegration is moving faster than integration, I would add myself. This disintegration has already touched the foundations of our common life, of our human culture, and the idea of national government, without which humanity loses the traits of well-ordered cultivated society and systematic political organization and becomes a scattered, formless mass of human beings. We have not yet found, under the new conditions of our living, that life-giving source and center which could undertake a creative labor with the assistance of the organizing powers of the country. Not only is there no such center, but there are also no organizing powers. Will the country emerge from this sickly state of ferment, and when it emerges will there be permanent centers around which the new forms of our life can gather? All these are questions on which depend, not only the retention of the blessings of the revolution, but also the outcome of the war and the fate of the nation. The nation can not live in the conditions of dual governmentand even many governments and, consequently, no government-which now prevail. Our unhappy country is struggling under the unbelievably heavy burdens of heretofore unknown war and internal disorder. Only one single governmental power, united in itself, and united with the people, resting securely on moral authority and popular confidence, can create the life-giving center which will save the country. Gentlemen, we inherited a heavy burden from the old régime. The old régime was incompetent in the affairs of peace, and proved itself to be still more incompetent in the affairs of war. The Russian nation and the Russian people paid for the sins of the old régime by countless deaths and sacrifices. Our glorious army, defending every inch of Russian land, fought under tremendous handicaps. May everlasting fame rest on the brows of those who have fallen victims to their duty and may the everlasting gratitude of their country be the lot of those who firmly continue the struggle! And the struggle is not hopeless. One more effort, one more effort of the army and the country in the rear of the army, and the enemy will be beaten. But are we strong enough to make this effort? Perhaps the last effort? I should like to believe that we are, because all that is dear to us, everything that makes life worth living, is bound up with this. Not only Russia's existence as a nation, not only our rights and freedom won in the hard struggle, not only the blessing studiously saved up for posterity, are bound up with this, but also the honor and good name of Russia, her dignity among the nations, and our right to be proud to be Russians. The army and the fleet greeted the revolution with joy as the salvation of Russia. From top to bottom all went over to the new régime as one man with a deep and touching belief in its creative powers. Work began with feverish energy everywhere in order to remodel the entire structure of the army and the fleet to the new principles of government and citizenship brought into Russian life by the revolution. This work was especially marked in regard to the living conditions and rules of life in the army and fleet. At one time it seemed as if our military power would be reborn with new and tenfold powers, as if a sacred enthusiasm would break forth, as if the will to victory would press on with the strength of a steel spring, as if a new, reasonable, and voluntary discipline would weld our army together in a way the old and antiquated discipline could not. It seemed as if the new, free army, born out of the revolution, would do deeds that would eclipse those of the old, enslaved, but still, still infinitely dear and glorious army of the old Russia. Gentlemen, this has not happened! We must honestly admit that this has not happened. Our military power is weakening and disintegrating! It is suffering from the same malady that the country is suffering from: dual government, many governments, absence of government-the same diagnosis and the same medicine (are needed). But the malady is especially acute in the army on account of the natural conditions prevailing in an army and necessity for cure is especially acute. And the malady is fatally dangerous to the nation. Are we too late with our attempts to heal the malady? I do not think we Will we not be too late if we delay even a little? I think we will be. are. That motto, "Peace at the front and war within the country," that deathbringing motto, that doctrine of international peace at any cost and civil war at any cost, which was brought to us by persons who may or may not know what they are doing, must be drowned in the compelling voice of the whole great Russian people crying: "War at the front and peace within the country!" Gentlemen, once the whole country admitted that “ our country is in danger." Gentlemen, we have moved a step forward; time waits for no one: "Our country is on the verge of ruin!" (Cries of "True! True!" Stormy applause on all benches except the extreme left.) File No. 861.002/46 The Ambassador in Russia (Francis) to the Secretary of State [Telegram] PETROGRAD, May 15, 1917, 2 p. m. 1289. Milyukov resigned, Tereshchenko appointed Minister of Foreign Affairs, Kerensky appointed Minister of War. No appointment yet to Ministry of Finance or Ministry [of] Justice. Kerensky and Tereshchenko both favor vigorous prosecution of war. It is believed these appointments will result in coalition cabinet in which workmen's committee favor offensive warfare which it is thought will be waged aggressively under reformed government. FRANCIS File No. 861.00/363 The Ambassador in Russia (Francis) to the Secretary of State [Telegram] PETROGRAD, May 16, 1917, 8 p. m. 1293. Situation complicated. Conditions unsatisfactory. Kerensky appointed Minister of War because it is believed he can persuade army to fight. Position of workmen's committee is that there should be conference between Allies, as ourselves and new Russian Government are not parties to old agreements, provisions of which are secret. They do not demand that treaties be made public but that we and the new Russian Government be acquainted therewith and express our satisfaction therewith provided we subscribe thereto. They appear to mistrust Milyukov who has just telephoned me that he has resigned and will see me at his house this evening. Says no successor has been appointed. Riga Consul reports soldiers fraternizing with Germans and cannot be induced to advance but would resist if attacked. Consul, Odessa, reports sentiment strongly favors peace without annexations or contributions and that serious military opera |