An all-Russian congress of lawyers was held in Petersburg. Here is the resolution of that congress:
Whereas: (1) Today’s bureaucratic system nationwide is not capable of satisfying the needs of the country; (2) The government itself was forced to acknowledge the necessity for the participation of elected representatives of the people in the empire-wide system; (3) Therefore, the time has come for self-government by society; (4) All attendees at the congress—however different their political and social views may be—are in agreement that our immediate task is the following: (a) Replacement of the existing bureaucratic system with a constitutional one; (b) Emancipation of all working sectors of the people from the oppression of existing economic conditions.
Therefore, the congress resolves: (1) To form a political association among lawyers for the realization of the above-mentioned tasks, that is, to establish in Russia a democratic-constitutional system on the basis of universal and equal suffrage and the secret ballot; (2) To make known to the public the formation of this association.
Thus, as we see, the Russian lawyers have found their way to taking political action in that they clearly and distinctly, without mincing words, raise constitutional demands. It might be possible to find many faults in this resolution. Above all, it is not clear, because while it does go so far as to call for universal, direct, and equal suffrage with a secret ballot, it must be specified more clearly what powers a parliament elected in this way would have, and what powers the government would have, and so on and so forth. Indeed, we could see that, although the zemstvo gentlemen, for example, were in favor of universal and equal suffrage and a secret ballot, they also wanted to have a bicameral legislature, with only the lower chamber being elected in this way, while in the second or upper chamber only representatives of large property would be seated, etc. However, since laws could only be passed with the approval of both chambers, it logically follows that only those laws would be passed as are agreeable to the nobility and bourgeoisie.
The lawyers, therefore, ought to have expressed themselves a bit more clearly. In any case, the fact remains that these Russian lawyers have thrown down the gauntlet; they want to fight the tsarist regime; and that is already saying something.
How did the gentleman of the Polish bar respond to this?
They vacillated for a long time over whether or not to take part in the congress. There were those who asserted that this congress “does not have anything in common with our interests.” But, in the end, they did send their representatives, and they made public the following resolution:
The Bar Association of the Kingdom of Poland constitutes a separate entity, and therefore cannot enter or join the projected Russia-wide union of lawyers. But it can enter into a relationship with the Russian Bar Association, when necessary, but only on the basis of full equality. It is necessary for the congress to recognize in regard to the Kingdom of Poland complete internal legal and administrative autonomy, based on universal, direct, and equal suffrage with the secret ballot for all citizens of the Kingdom of Poland. Representatives of the Polish Bar Association express their sympathy for the Russian constitutional movement. Its representatives will take part in the further proceedings of the congress only if the congress recognizes the necessity for autonomy for the Kingdom of Poland.
What a strange resolution! The gentlemen lawyers “express their sympathy for the Russian constitutional movement.” Very lovely on their part, and we take note that at least their sympathy does not lie with the absolutist government. That is certainly a step forward, because our honorable Mr. Peplowski, “our widely known and respected attorney,” for example, declines to defend socialists before a military court because he considers this “a filthy business.” Another attorney, Mr. [Włodzimierz] Spasowicz, is definitely a supporter of tsarism. To “express sympathy” is all well and good, but what then? The lawyers’ congress constituted itself as a political organization whose task is to fight for a constitution. The gentlemen of the Polish bar took part in the proceedings of the congress, because that congress not only recognized the autonomy of the Kingdom [of Poland] but also recognized the general right of autonomy for all nationalities in the Russian empire. But the gentlemen of the Polish bar did not join that union, because they “constitute a separate entity.”
What will this “separate entity” be doing later on? It will keep on “expressing sympathy”—and will not lift a finger, will only twiddle its thumbs.
No, gentlemen of the Polish Bar Association, it is not about sympathy! When gunfire is loudly resounding in our country, when the Polish proletariat is fighting against absolutism, when blood is being spilled on the streets of Warsaw and Łódź, when a thirst for revolution has taken hold of the whole country, you have sympathy but you remain silent. Today, anyone who is not with the revolution is against it—regardless of their sympathy.
Look out, gentlemen lawyers, lest the revolution reply to you in the words of St. John of the Apocalypse, “I know thy deeds; that they are neither hot nor cold. Since you are lukewarm, I spit thee out of my mouth.”*
Truly, this is a remarkable situation. The Polish proletariat stands at the head of the proletariat in the whole Russian state. It now constitutes the vanguard of the revolution. But the Polish intelligentsia expresses its sympathy. Ha! That is too bad. Let the dead bury the dead. For those members of the intelligentsia who, nevertheless, are not satisfied with the role of “sympathizers,” who are eager for active struggle, and not a passive emphasis on “separateness,” who don’t want to sit around twiddling their thumbs, to them we say, the road is open to join the ranks of the revolutionary proletariat. Here you will find people who are demanding autonomy for our country, but also know how to fight for autonomy by fighting against tsarism.