$2.

00

Tchernychewskys Life and Trial

V.1.0

Liberty(2.0) presents:

Along with being one of the leading anarchist journals in 19th-century America, Benjamin R. Tuckers Liberty was a showcase for new European literature. Tucker himself was a busy translator, as were Liberty stalwarts Victor Yarros and Sarah E. Holmes, and the pages of the journal were usually graced by several simultaneous serial translations. Among the famous works first introduced to English readers in the pages of Liberty, Nikolai Chernyshevskys Whats To Be Done? was among the most important. This short account of the authors life and the political trial which led to his imprisonment and exile, was published shortly after Tuckers translation finished its run in Liberty. 3 3 3

LIBERTY2.0 is a re-presentation of material from Benjamin R. Tuckers long-running anarchist journal, Liberty (1881-1907): serial stories collected, some for the first time; key debates assembled; and individual issues transcribed and annotated. All issues are available in pdf form from the Libertarian Labyrinth archive, and transcription is underway, with the hope of having the entire archive in searchable text form by mid-2010.
http://libertarian-labyrinth.org/archive/Liberty_(1881-1907)

Tchernychewskys Life and Trial

Translated from the Russian for Liberty by Victor Yarros.

A CORVUS EDITION
corvusdistribution.org

Tchernychewskys Life and Trial

own country. In October, 1883, the joyful and unexpected news spread over unhappy Russia that Tchernychewsky, the great teacher and hero, had been pardoned by the czar. Can it be true? the disconsolate subjects of the czar asked themselves, and shook their heads in melancholy doubt. But it was true. On the twenty-seventh of October, 1883, after twenty years of exile, N. G. Tchernychewsky returned from Siberia. He lives now in Astrachan under police surveillance, and this place he is not allowed to leave. His wife is with him. They occupy a small house in the central part of the city. They lead a very quiet and retired life. The authorities, it is understood, are instructed to discourage any curious strangers from visiting Tchernychewsky, nor is Tchernychewsky himself anxious to receive visitors. For well known reasons no representatives of the Russian press interviewed him, and absolutely nothing was said in the newspapers about the event. A correspondent of the London Daily News visited Tchernychewsky at his home. He was received courteously, though in a somewhat reserved manner. At first Tchernychewsky impressed him as very vigorous and wellpreserved, but the impression was illusive. The expression of mental vigor, so familiar in Tchernychewskys photographs, has entirely disappeared. He is extremely nervous; his look is troubled and restless; his eyes wander continually from one object to another; some of his movements are purely convulsive. From time to time a curt, dry remark involuntarily escaped him, as if his mind dwelt on some past memories, but whether they were of a painful or pleasant nature it was difficult to divine. His health is ruined. The twenty years of exile have had a most disastrous effect on the greatest thinker and writer of modern Russia. His only wish, if he can be said to have any wishes, is rest, absolute rest. . . I take my hat off and reverently bow in taking leave of the author of Whats To Be Done? eee

SOURCE: Liberty, Nos. 82-85, June 19-July 31, 1886.

Nicholas Govrilovitch Tchernychewsky was born in Saratoff in 1829. His father, a clergyman, was a very intelligent and benevolent person, whose exceptional honesty and kindness won him the love and admiration of all who knew him. The poor had in him a devoted friend and adviser. He was, in short, very little of a priest. Young Tchernychewsky attended the seminary, where he studied ancient languages and the Bible. His knowledge of the last was perfect. He was a strict dogmatic Christian so long as he did not do his own thinking and his brains were not consulted in matters of faith and religious habits. Soon, however, Tchernychewsky grew sceptical and began to feel uncomfortable in the close atmosphere in which he moved and lived. His father not objecting, he went to St. Petersburg and entered college, choosing the philological faculty. He sought to perfect his knowledge of ancient languages, and diligently read everything recommended by his professors. He looked up old manuscripts and compiled dictionaries for them. Philosophical criticism and social science were not then in his line. An accidental acquaintance completely changed his programme of study and manner of life. He was introduced into one of those highly interesting little groups that make student life in Russia so attractive and fascinating. The entertaining and enlivening conversations at the tea-table; the instructive and hot discussions and the long debates, of which, as Tourguneff says, only the Russians are capable, opened Tchernychewskys eyes to a new and unknown world. There he first heard of the social and political problems of the day; there he caught a glimpse of modern life, and with surprise, interest, and enthusiasm he rushed out of his gloomy and dark quarters into the broad daylight of social and political life and activity. He left the company of the dead for that of the living. Giving up his old manuscripts, he devoted himself entirely to the study of economics and social science. He read everything he could lay his hands upon in Russian, German, and French. And owing to his great natural abilities, to his strong intellect, splendid memory, and love of dialectics, he soon outstripped his friends and teachers, and took up the high station in the group which naturally belonged to him. He appeared a new man among the advanced new types of Russian civilized society. In 1850 he graduated, and, obeying his mothers will, went to Saratoff and took the position of professor in the local gymnasium. This was a very great sacrifice on Tchernychewskys part, as he left in St. Petersburg a number of warm personal friends and admirers, and deprived himself of the

16

Tchernychewskys Life and Trial

Tchernychewskys Life and Trial

means of continuing his scientific studies. In Saratoff he found an oldfashioned, ugly school, with a number of antediluvian bigots as teachers and an old stupid Jesuitical director. In society, even among its most liberal and cultured representatives, he hardly found two or three persons who did not share the general contempt for the cranky and unconventional new professor. In his family, too, he felt himself a stranger, having very little in common with that quiet nest. Only when alone in his own room did he feel at ease. There he used to be visited, now and then, by a few, very few friends and some young students of his class, who were surprisedand charmed by Tchernychewskys novel way of treatment and unusual cordiality. He canvassed and discussed all kinds of subjects with them in the most plain, frank, and unassuming manner, treating them as equals,a thing never heard of before in Saratoff! Great was Tchernychewskys moral influence; much good did he accomplish among his youthful companions. He always succeeded in breathing new vitality, fresh courage and hope, into the despondent and despairing young fellows, who easily break down under unfavorable circumstances, and who have that unfortunate trait in their character of losing all courage and strength after one or two futile attempts at gaining some end in view. And, to the great horror of the clean and respectable school authorities, he was known to have occasionally furnished money and other things to the starving and barefooted students. Thus Tchernychewsky passed two years. His life was not very interesting, though he tried to make the best of it. Now and then, to please his loving and beloved mother, Tchernychewsky suffered himself to be taken to parties and entertainments, or visited his family connections, where he was obliged to pass long, tedious hours in the society of government clerks, officials, and other dry and lifeless individuals. But so strong was the influence and magic of this exceptionally bright nature that even these conservative, musty personages felt uncomfortable and nervous in his presence. Not a few of these were actually converted and saved by Tchernychewsky. They reformed their habits, gave up the practice of bribetaking, treated their children less tyrannically, and generally sought to live more honorable and decent lives. In this sphere Tchernychewsky met a young girl, whom he loved with all the ardor and passion of a youth. In his lectures and correspondence he talked about the ennobling influence of love and the charms of married life. They were married in 1853. A short time before the marriage his mother died. Tchernychewsky was deeply affected by this sudden loss. But as he did
2

government fear such men? It is needless to add that these bold utterances brought the paper to an early grave. The government feared Tchernychewskys influence, and, like all blind and maddened tyrants, only increased it by its suicidal policy. His writings were suppressed; no one was allowed to speak about them or mention his name; but this was precisely the best method of making his name a peculiar charm to enthusiastic and spirited youths. Indeed, Tchernychewskys influence and the importance of the part he played in creating and directing the revolutionary drift that will yet carry away the whole fabric of barbarism and tyranny can hardly be over-estimated. We can only wonder how much more he would have done for the cause of degraded and law-ridden humanity! The government early discovered the danger that threatened established institutions and determined to extinguish the Tight before it kindled into a blaze. Did it succeed? Let the history of Russia for the last two decades answer I Of Tchernychewskys life in exile very little is known. He passed seven years in the Zalaikalsky district, working at various occupations. In the mines he actually worked only a few weeks. After 1871 he lived in Viluisk (near Iakutsk) as a convict settler. He occupied a small hut with an adjoining garden, where he worked several hours every day. The peasants called him saint. Sometimes he visited them and talked with them about the conditions of life in that part of the country, but this had to be discontinued, as the authorities accused him of spreading revolutionary ideas among the peasants. During the first few years Nekrasoff and his other co-workers on the Sovremennic supplied him with money; afterwards the government allowed him two hundred roubles a year. As everything is very cheap in that region, he found this sum sufficient to supply his few and simple wants. No correspondence with his wife or friends was allowed. He had some volumes of poetry and a few other books, but Byron was the most serious writer whom he was allowed to enjoy. Of newspapers he had a small local publication and the Illustrated London News. On the whole, Tchernychewsky appears to have been treated decently by the local authorities, although, of course, his movements were strictly watched. Now and then he would write something, but he burned all his manuscripts. Thus Tchernychewsky passed twenty years of his life. What a tragical fate for such a man! Who can measure the intensity of the sufferings he underwent during these long years of enforced idleness and helplessness? No wonder that the reports of his insanity found so many believers in his
15

Tchernychewskys Life and Trial

Tchernychewskys Life and Trial

exercised exceptional power over the youth of the country, whom he endeavored to convert into adherents to his extreme socialistic and materialistic views, advocating the forcible overthrow of the existing government a& the means of realizing those ideas, and thus was a particularly dangerous agitator, and considering his obstinate refusal to admit the truth of the charges in spite of the overwhelming evidence, the Senatorial Council thinks it necessary that Tchernychewsky should suffer the severest penalty of the law, and sentences titular councillor N. G. Tcheruychewsky, aged thirty-five years, to fourteen years of hard labor in the mines and, at the expiration of that term, to banishment to Siberia for life. 9 a. m., June 13, 1864, was the time fixed for the reading of the decision. In spite of the heavy rain that commenced at daybreak, Mistin Square was thronged at the appointed hour. The outward appearance of the crowd indicated that they belonged to the cultured classes of society. Few gained admittance into the court room. Tchernychewsky was greatly changed. He looked pale and haggard. He did not utter a word. When the official conspirator began to read the shameful government fraud, Tchernychewsky turned his face to the wall, and remained so till the sentence was pronounced. Then his hands were put through two iron rings attached to a scaffold. A sabre was broken. At this moment a bouquet was thrown at Tchernychewskys feet. . . . . Nicholas Govrilovitch Tchernychewsky was hurriedly led out and transported to the Siberian mines. . . . This incomplete sketch of Tchernychewskys early life and trial represents all that could be gathered from private sources. Since 1862 Russia has virtually been under a reign of terror. The world has heard much about the Lopoukhoffs, Kirsanoffs, Rakhmetoffs, but nothing about their author. For more than twenty years Tchernychewskys name was not once mentioned in the press; but he was not forgotten by young Russia. The famous revolutionist Mishkin made an attempt to rescue Tchernychewsky, but the plot was discovered at the last moment, and Tchernychewskys lot was made bitterer and sadder than before. The international literary congress assembled in Vienna petitioned for Tchernychewskys release, but no attention was paid to it by the czar. A radical Russian newspaper was bold enough to take up the matter, and in a very able article urged the government to set Tchernychewsky free. He was an honest and brave man, said the writer; can any honest
14

not express his grief in such manifestations as would fully satisfy the respectable and virtuous provincial society, as he did not wail and sob in church, did not fall on the coffin in a deep swoon, and was shameless and impudent enough to leave his father at such a time and contract marriage before the term of mourning fixed by provincial etiquette had expired,the bon ton society of Saratoff with exceptional unanimity declared Tchernychewsky a heartless, soulless, unfeeling, and indecent son. The old gentleman, however, thought otherwise. He was very proud of his Nicholas, and was glad that he went to St. Petersburg, as he well knew that a fuller and better life was in store for him in the capital. When, in 1862, his father died, surrounded by friends and admirers, Tchernychewsky was again roughly handled by public opinion. He was charged by society with nothing less than parricide, as it was universally agreed that his pitiless indifference and ingratitude were the cause of the poor old gentlemans death. Meantime Tchernychewsky, depressed and moneyless, struggled hard in St. Petersburg. He gave lessons in some government military school, translated novels for the Russian magazines, and worked away the rest of his time at a dissertation On the sthetical Relations of Art to Reality, by which he was to obtain a diploma of master of arts. He properly passed the examination, and ably defended his masterly dissertation. The minister of public education, the conservative professors and learned officials, did not at all like the views and ideas of this bold and supercritical young man . . . They detected in his dissertation a dangerous tendency to belittle the role and importance of pure, ideal art. Self-confident and smiling, Tchernychewsky sarcastically answered the timid savants. He made fun of the absolute importance of the Ideal, and showed very little respect for old traditions and authorities. This, of course, could not be tolerated, and Tchernychewsky was not awarded the diploma. Just about this time he quarrelled with the liberal authorities of the military school, and, in consequence, gave up his professorship there. After that he devoted himself to literary work exclusively. His first notable paper was a review of a pamphlet On Aristotle, written by a renowned Moscow professor. The paper was hurriedly written, with little care and in a very short time; but the learned professor was deeply hurt, and keenly felt the well-directed criticisms of the young philosopher. His illfated dissertation On the sthetical Relations of Art to Reality made him famous. It made his views and tendencies familiar to the best literary
3

Tchernychewskys Life and Trial

Tchernychewskys Life and Trial

circles and leading journals of the day, who at once recognized in him a superior talent and a great mind. The Sovremennic (Contemporary) engaged him permanently on its editorial staff, and gave up into his management the best two departments of the magazine,the critical and political. The Sovremennic was the most radical and brilliant periodical of that time. Here Tchernychewsky found his opportunity for the highest and fullest development of his remarkable intellectual powers. Here was a broad and magnificent field for active work; here was a channel for the full expression of his best thoughts. And, indeed, soon the splendor and lustre of his genius was revealed. His writings were widely and eagerly read. He inspired the youth of the country with enthusiasm for intellectual development and moral culture; he made life worth living for the mature elements of society, and raised literature to a very high standard. Who does not remember his series of articles On the Poushkin and Gogol Period in Russian Literature, which surprised everybody with its deep and extensive knowledge, clearness and force of expression, its dash and boldness in smashing and annihilating old literary idols? Those articles have revolutionized Russian literature. Many were charmed and filled with unbounded admiration for the new and young literary hero; some were displeased and angered; but no one remained indifferent, no one ignored the new drift. His teachings and methods were alike novel and fascinating. This wondrous and extraordinary success did not turn Tchernychewskys head. He was neither proud nor vain. He worked very hard; from early morning till night he was at his desk. He loved his work for its own sake, and was utterly indifferent to public opinion. Being neither proud nor vain, he kept aloof from the lite of the literary world and passed his leisure hours in the society of struggling young journalists and students unknown to fame. He was ambitious, but his ambition was of the noblest and highest order. With the death of Nicholas I. a new era dawned upon Russia. The Crimean war had stirred up the sleeping giant, given a strong impulse to Russian political life, and brought many burning questions to the front. Alexander II. was posing as a liberal ruler and liberator. The air was filled with reform perfumes. The liberal monarch soon tired of this comedy and tore off the mask of civilization he had worn; but, while this spell lasted, Tchernychewsky accomplished much. He grew bold and outspoken. He preached socialistic doctrines, proposed reform measures, spoke of radical transformations in many national institutions, confident in the sincerity of the governments professions and trusting to the influence of
4

connections between them, all of them being professional writers, but no other. The letter and note he pronounced counterfeits, and he petitioned for permission to collate the handwritings with the aid of a strong magnifying glass. This was not granted, as the Senatorial Commission was satisfied that all due accuracy was observed and the law strictly complied with in the investigation. After careful consideration and dispassionate deliberations the Senatorial Commission submits the following: The prisoner is charged with three offences: I. Unlawful connection with the political offender and exile, Herzen, who is undermining the existing forms of government, and participation in the latters criminal designs. This charge is based on unsatisfactory evidence, and therefore declared unproven. II. Authorship of a manifesto addressed to the serfs, of the most seditious character, which was intended for publication and wide circulation among the peasants. The proofs of this charge are: (a) the testimony of V. Kostomaroff, who gave a full account of the matter; (b) the note left by Tchernychewsky at Kostomaroffs quarters, requesting him to change some expression in the text of the manifesto; (c) the testimony of the convict Michailoff; (d) the testimony of Iakovleff, who was in the employ of V. Kostomaroff. III. Inciting to riot and plotting against the government. Material proof of this is found in the letter to journalist Plescheieff, which substantiates all the other charges, and clearly shows that Tchernychewsky is legally guilty as well as morally. In that letter he reproaches his friend for his neglect and tardiness, and informs him that other arrangements were made concerning the publication of his revolutionary manifesto. We thus find that Tchernychewsky cultivated the acquaintance of other conspirators, who were disturbing public peace by their incendiary literature. This evidence leaves no doubt as to the existence of a plot to overthrow the government, in which Tcheruychewsky played a very important part. This crime comes under the head of Article 283, Vol. XV, of the code of capital crimes. But owing to the consideration that these plots were discovered in time to prevent any actual disturbance from taking place, and considering that nothing serious had occurred in consequence of their propaganda, Tchernychewsky is subject to the penalty provided by the third or fourth degree of Article 284. Bearing in mind that Tchernychewsky, being a popular writer and one of the directing minds on the Sovremennic,
13

Tchernychewskys Life and Trial

Tchernychewskys Life and Trial

consideration. The letter is signed by the initial T and addressed to some Aleksei Nicolaievitch (doubtless Plescheieff). It reads thus: My dear Aleksei Nicol., you will perhaps reproach me, and not unjustly, with carelessness and imprudence. I place too much confidence in people but little known to us. I know how dangerous it is, but can I help it or avoid it? We cannot afford to wait and waste opportunities. Now or never. To reflect and hesitate is criminal. It would be an inexcusable weakness, an irreparable mistake. You have not yet furnished us with the press which you promised nearly a year ago. We waited. All the time various parties have been offering us their services, but we declined to accept them. Now delay is no longer possible. We must act at once, if we do not wish to lose the game. I have entrusted the work to some persons who have been in this line before. They are not very bright, but they seem to be very energetic and earnest. There can hardly be any danger of exposure, as that would entail the severest penalty on themselves. Nevertheless, try to stop all talk about my acquaintance with these persons. I understand that Soulin and Soroka are not looked upon very favorably in the Moscow circles, so you will find no difficulty in disclaiming any connection with them. As to Kostomaroff, I think he can safely be relied upon. At any rate, he is very useful and active so far. However, we must not be too frank with him till he is put to some serious test. I do not write anything about our literary interests, for I have no time. Kostomaroff is hurrying me. I see you are still inclined to take a sceptical and discouraging view of the affair. Too bad! It wont do at all. It is a sin to be passive now when everybody is astir. More energy, more faith! I am very busy. I press your hand. Cordially, T. In regard to this letter Kostomaroff stated that he was to deliver it in person to Plescheieff immediately after his arrival at Moscow, but that he mislaid it and could not execute the commission. When he finally found it among his things, it was stained and torn, and he did not care to show it it to Plescheieff. The handwriting of this letter was found to be perfectly similar to that of other papers on file, which were not disclaimed by Tchernychewsky. The accused answered all these charges with a wholesale denial, and declared the evidence false. Neither on his examinations, nor on confrontation with Kostomaroff and lakovleff, did he avow his guilt. While he did not attempt to conceal the fact of his intimate acquaintance with Kostomaroff and Michailoff, he asserted that there were purely literary
12

cultured society. He entered into a discussion, which grew warmer and sharper as it developed, with learned officials, collegiate and State economists, on the question of land ownership, defending the Russian rural commune and attacking with his powerful weapons of sarcasm and wit what he called the philosophical prejudices against the rural commune. Defeated on the field of fair and honest debate, his enemies had recourse to vile denunciations and personal abuse. The question with or without land? which was a natural concomitant to the serf-liberation agitation, was solved by Tchernychewsky in such a manner as to give the opposition a very favorable opportunity to open fire on him. Then the crusade against Tchernychewsky began. He was savagely attacked from all sides; he was plainly accused of revolutionary propaganda, of inciting the peasants to riot and robbery of the landowners. He was denounced as a dangerous socialist seeking to ruin the State and destroy all law and order. The hirelings of the press joined in this hue and cry of alarmed stupidity. The press found it more comfortable and safer to serve the powers that be than bear the burden of truth and honesty. This could not fail to have a crushing effect on Tchernychewsky, who yet found the courage to meet his enemies face to face and hold them to account. He wrote a series of articles on the Beauties of Polemics, which have never been equalled by any of the most personal writers. They were the bitterest and the most cutting of all that came from his pen. Tchernychewsky stood alone, but he knew that Young Russia loved him, read arid understood him, and he wished for no other or better support. The government attempted to ensnare Tchernychewsky and destroy his influence by compromising his moral integrity. He was offered by an official of very high standing the position of editor of a semi-official reactionary sheet, the St. Petersburg Journal, with the understanding that he was at liberty to change its tone; but Tchernychewsky evaded this skilful plot. Afterwards he was asked to take charge of the Military Magazine. This position he accepted on certain conditions, only to find out that he was deceived, whereupon he withdrew. The government then took a serious view of the matter. Tchernychewsky was altogether too dangerous a person to be suffered at large, preaching his doctrines and exercising such exceptional power over the impulsive elements of the country. When all legal and decent means were exhausted, the government did not hesitate to employ another agency. Anonymous letters were fabricated at the third, or secret, department of police, in which outside parties were made to
5

Tchernychewskys Life and Trial

Tchernychewskys Life and Trial

complain of Tchernychewsky and accuse him of all possible offences and conspiracies. Tchernychewsky was peremptorily arrested. The government had accomplished its object, it had torn Tchernychewsky from the Sovremennic. But it found itself in a very awkward and distressing position: there were no charges proven and no evidence whatever of Tchernychewskys guilt. In fact, there was absolutely Clothing to show against him. As to the fraudulent anonymous letters, there is a statute distinctly excluding all such evidence and disallowing any action on its weight. What was to be done? A happy thought struck the long heads of the official cut-throats. I. Arsenieff was instructed to make an inculpatory review of Tchernychewskys writings, to detect in them a revolutionary spirit and criminal tendencies. This was most ambitiously done, but proved unsatisfactory. All of his writings, previous to their publication, were subjected to a most vigilant censorship, and could not, in face of shame and decency, serve as a basis for indictment. The government would not permit such a trifle as the absence of legal evidence to stand in its way. Charges were invented. Fraud and trickery, libel and falsehood, were brought into play. The notorious V. Kostomaroff, that sham political prisoner, who had rendered such invaluable service to the authorities in the case of that other Russian man of letters, Michailoff, appeared on the scene. The two official conspirators, Golitzin and Potopoff, solicited the advice aud cooperation of this informer. He had a plan. He knew a person in Moscow, a certain lakovleff, who would do anything for money. He could be induced to come to St. Petersburg and appear before Potopoff to denounce Tchernychewsky as an agitator and revolutionary socialist. He was to relate how, together with other peasants, he used to visit Tchernychewsky, who ridiculed their respect for the law and sneered at their admiration of the Czar-liberator, asking them how they liked freedom and inciting them to riot and rebellion. This plan was enthusiastically endorsed by the upholders of law and justice, but unfortunately it was not triumphantly carried out. The reliable Moscovite did not prove trustworthy. He came to St. Petersburg, got drunk on the money paid in advance by Kostomaroff for his services, and disclosed all. He boasted that a good reward was promised him if successful and smart, and wondered why it was so necessary to belie Tchernychewsky. The rumor of this foul plot spread rapidly in St. Petersburg and filled everybody with indignation. Tchernychewskys coworkers on the Sovremennic hastened to inform Potopoff about it in
6

conclusion, the author recommends secret organization of the peasantry, the militia, and the city laborers for the purpose of violent overthrow of the government when the proper time comes and a signal is given by the author to rise. The officer in charge of Kostomaroff, while en route, reported that a man named Iakovleff visited Kostomaroff when the latter was ill and had a very long conversation with him, from which the officer gathered the knowledge that Iakovleff knew the exact character of the relations between Kostomaroff and Tchernychewsky. Believing that some useful information could thus be produced, the officer requested Iakovleff to prepare a written statement of the matter, to which the latter readily consented. This statement was duly forwarded to the third department, Iakovleff testifies as follows. In the summer of 1861 he was employed by Kostomaroff as a clerk and copyist of manuscripts. Kostomaroff used to be visited quite often by a gentleman who was spoken of as the celebrated St. Petersburg journalist, N. G. Tchernychewsky. Once, while they were promenading arm-in-arm in the garden, Iakovleff heard them talk of publishing some circular from Tchernychewskys pen. Tchernychewsky then used the following expression: Best compliments to the serfs from their well-wishers. You have expected freedom from the czar; now you have got it. He paid no attention to the remark, for, not suspecting anything, he out half understood the meaning of the words. But now, having heard that Kostomaroff is charged with conspiracy and plotting against government, he regards it as a duty to report all he knows. It was afterwards ascertained that Iakovleff intended to appear personally before Potapoff, and with this end in view had left for St. Petersburg, but was locked up on a charge of drunkenness and turbulence. He was promptly brought before the authorities and cross-examined. He repeated his former statements, and recognized in Tchernychewsky that visitor of Kostomaroff whom he described. Michailoff, the journalist who was convicted of revolutionary propaganda and sentenced to hard labor in the mines, admitted in the course of his trial that he knew of the circulars To the serfs and To the soldiers, that he had copied and corrected them, but persistently refused to reveal the names of his associates. The minister of justice directed the attorney general to lay a letter received at the third department before the Commission for careful
11

Tchernychewskys Life and Trial

Tchernychewskys Life and Trial

others misconduct, and I keenly feel this injustice. Endeavoring to throw off all suspicion from Tchernychewsky, I have sacrificed my own liberty and honor. I am fully conscious of the enormity of the sin I have committed against myself and society. Tchernychewskys teachings are poisonous, his influence upon youthful enthusiasts extremely pernicious. This letter caused the third department to order Kostomaroff back. He wasn immediately ordered to appear before the St. Petersburg authorities for examination. On his person (?) was found a note signed T, and addressed to himself, in which he is requested to correct a certain phrase in the proclamation To the Serfs. Kostomaroff explained that the note was left at his rooms by Tchernychewskv, who called on him, but did not find him at home. Tchernychewsky denied alike the authorship of the proclamation To the Serfs and the alleged visit to Kostomaroff for the purpose of making some alteration in the original text. The note, he declared, was a counterfeit. The clerks of the Senate, comparing Tchernychewskys handwriting with that of the said note, have expressed the opinion that, although there is no likeness in the general character of the handwritings, and the first impression is likely to be favorable to Tchernychewskys statement, yet a considerable number of separate letters, namely, twelve out of the twenty-five, the whole number of letters in the note, are similar to Tchernychewskys. The Senatorial Council decided that both in separate letters and in the general character of the handwritings there is a perfect similarity. The proclamation To the Serfs, a copy of which, in some unknown handwriting, was attached to the file of documents of Kostomaroffs case, the latter declares to be the production of Tchernychewsky. In this proclamation, apparently written for the peasantry and all sorts of illiterate laborers, the Ukase of the 19th of February is deliberately and wilfully misreported and misrepresented. The author asserts that the serfs were deceived and betrayed by the czar; that, instead of the freedom he promised to give them, instead of the improvement they expected from the Ukase, they are, in virtue of the Ukase, still more enslaved and impoverished; that true freedom and real improvement can never be had under the czars, as the people can easily be shown; real freedom exists only in those countries where there is no compulsory military service, no heavy taxes, no passport system, as, for instance, in France or England. There the will of the common people rules supreme, and the nominal rulers, or kings, are directly elected by the people, in whom also lies the power of replacing them. In
10

order to warn him against malicious slanders and false testimony against Tchernychewsky, whose case was in his hands. It was a desperate case, and the plotters resolved to try a desperate means. A circular of the most incendiary and revolutionary character was printed in the secret police department and addressed to the serfs. The manuscript of the circular counterfeited Tchernychewskys hand-writing. A note was written in the same hand-writing to journalist Plescheieff, which, though containing nothing positively offensive to the govern ment, had a good deal between the lines and many obscure, suspicious expressions, as, for instance, this is a time for action, not reflection. This was all. There was and could be no other evidence against Tchernychewsky. Thus was made up a case, which was deliberately dragged along two years in the expectation that the prisoner would be forced to confess to some offence in order to bring his sufferings and terrible suspense to an end. In prison he suffered intensely. The tyranny and cruelty of the authorities knew no bounds. He was not allowed to pass five minutes with his sick and helpless wife except in the presence of some titled ruffian. He was often reduced to the necessity of refusing food several days in succession to gain some point or concession from his heartless torturers. But Tchernychewsky was firm, bold, and defiant to the last. He denied all knowledge of the secret circular and the note to Plescheieff. He denounced his persecutors at every interview, accused them of conspiracy and fraud, and in every way expressed his contempt and abhorrence of these miserable cowards. The astonished journalist Plescheieff emphatically denied that he ever received any such notes from Tchernychewsky, and declared the hand-writing to be a counterfeit of Tchernychewskys. Many of the official clerks and secretaries who were called in as experts were obliged to admit this. We reproduce here the official document of the case. It will throw some light on Russian law and justice. Titular councillor N. G. Tchernychewsky, a journalist by profession, was one of the editors of the Sovremennic. The tone and tendencies of that periodical have attracted the attention of the government. It had chiefly propagated materialistic and socialistic ideas aiming at the complete negation of authority, religion, and morality. The government deemed it proper to temporarily stop the publication of that periodical. At the same
7

Tchernychewskys Life and Trial

Tchernychewskys Life and Trial

time certain facts were disclosed which led to Tchernychewskys arrest, it being proved that he is one of the dangerous agitators and rebels to the law. At the third department of His Imperial Majestys Police an anonymous letter had been received, in which the government was warned against Tchernychewsky, that cunning socialist and traducer of youth, who boasted that he will never be detected in his crimes. Tchernychewsky, says the writer, is a revolutionary propagandist, repudiated by all his former friends. If you do not restrain him, there will surely be serious trouble and bloodshed. Everywhere secret societies are being organized, and the youth are inflamed by their incendiary talk. These demagogues and desperadoes are capable of any beastly deed. Even if they shall eventually be crushed out, many innocent lives will have been sacrificed. Rid us of Tchernychewsky in the interest of public peace and order. In June, 1862, information was received at the third department that a certain Vetoshkin, a friend of Herzen and Bakounine, was on his way to Russia from London, carrying correspondence from the above-mentioned exiles and a lot of revolutionary publications. The police succeeded in arresting Vetoshkin, and among other things found in his possession was a letter from Herzen to Serno-Soloviovitch, in which the latter is urged to push the revolutionary propaganda in Russia with more vigor, and in which Herzen takes occasion to inform him of his and Tchernychewskys intention to publish the Sovremennic somewhere outside of Russia.1 In consequence of this letter Tchernychewsky was arrested and his apartments carefully searched. Among the confiscated things bearing upon the case are: (1) An anonymous note in regard to the manifestation at Moscow at a lecture of Professor Kostomaroff in March, 1862, stating that the case will not be investigated, and that nobody need fear any trouble; (2) A letter from Moscow in Bartukoffs handwriting, stating that the city is deeply agitated over the Tver troubles, and that a revolution is feared; (3) An unaddressed letter from Herzen, criticising Tchernychewskys advice not to enlist the youth in any literary societies, and proposing in vague expressions some plan of a secret organization with branches in the provincial towns; (4) An unsigned threatening letter to Tchernychewsky, in which he is charged with the intention to destroy the existing State and
1

This Herzen pronounced a lie. He did publicly offer to publish the Sovremennic at his expense in London or Geneva after it was temporarily suppressed by the government, but his offer was never accepted or considered by the editors. 8

establish a democracy; (5) An alphabetical key on some pieces of paper and a diary which appears to have been written before his marriage. In the diary was found what appeared to be a copy of a letter to his betrothed, in which the following paragraph and the thoughts expressed therein attract attention: I am liable to be taken at any moment, whatever I may do. Nothing would be found, but I have numerous and powerful enemies; I would restrain myself and say nothing; but I shall hardly be able to stand it very long. Sooner or later I should certainly lose patience and speak my mind freely and openly; then, of course, farewell to freedom! I could never hope to be outside of the prison walls. When already in prison, Tchernychewsky, in a letter to his wife, wrote as follows: Our lives will be recorded in history. Centuries will pass and our memory will still be dear to the hearts of men who will not cease to love us and think of us with gratitude. Further, explaining to his wife that he intends to publish an encyclopaedia of knowledge and life, he writes that no work of such magnitude has been undertaken since Aristotle, and that, like Aristotle, he will be a guide and teacher to humanity for many centuries. While Tchernychewskys case was being investigated, B. Kostomaroff was tried and convicted for circulating revolutionary literature at Moscow. On his way to Siberia he was suddenly taken ill. He wrote a letter to a friend of his, a certain Sokoloff, which the officer in charge of him forwarded to the St. Petersburg police authorities. Kostomaroff tells his friend how Tchernychewsky brought all the trouble upon his head. He declares that the proclamation addressed to the serfs was written by Tchernychewsky and Michailoff, and the proclamation To the soldiers by Colonel Shelgunoff. Characterizing Tchernychewsky as an agitator, who had led astray a number of young, inexperienced people, he says: The biblical Samson fell together with the temple whose pillars he had shaken loose and was buried beneath its ruins, while our Samson knows better than that: he will have others do the dangerous and destructive work, and sit quietly by, watching the end. If they succeed in demolishing the old structures, he will go to superintend the erection of new ones. If they fail, and are crushed in the attempt, he remains safe and undisturbed. You must not blame me, continues Kostomaroff, for my seemingly strange and inexplicable conduct during the trial. I had documents in my possession, which would have cleared me and exposed the true offenders, but it was impossible for me to act otherwise than I did. So I silently took the responsibility of the matter upon myself. Now, when it is all over, it seems very unjust to suffer for
9