HARVARD UKRAINIAN STUDIES - See also - Harvard University

THE WORKERS' UNION AND THE JEWS 207kill innocent people. This is the new state of affairs. Let us, brethren, stand upmore staunchly for our just cause. 53The author of the leaflet was undoubtedly Pavlo Ivaniv, as verified byevidence from police sources and noted in Koval'skaia's recollections.54One can analyze and evaluate the union's last leaflet from severalstandpoints: its reverberations not only in Russia but abroad; itsimmediate impact on the course of events and their aftermath; itsattitude toward the ongoing pogrom as well as on other aspects ofJewish life; the contrast between the opinions expressed there and theattitudes of other factions in the revolutionary camp; a comparison ofits statements with the stand the union itself had taken on Jewishproblems previously.As yet, we do not know of any revolutionary document whichdirectly influenced the pogroms. The proclamation of the union asexpressed in its leaflet represents the first reaction to the pogroms by arevolutionary organization whose history, program, and compositionwe know quite well. 55It stands alone as an official response by arevolutionary group which was directly involved in the occurrence ofthe pogrom. Its pronouncements were reflected in the opinions ofgovernment officials on the causes of the pogroms and the motives oftheir perpetrators, and had some effect on immediate official conduct53First to republish the leaflet was Krasnyi-Admoni (Materiały, p. 225), who tookit from the archives of the police department. That is the source used here(orthography has been modernized). Afterwards, in the 1920s, it was reprintedrepeatedly, usually with the irrelevant omission of the word pravoe ("just") fromthe last sentence.On 30 May 1881, the New York Times, based on correspondence from Paris,ascribed the initiating role in the pogrom to the "conspirators" of the union(referred to as the "League of the Southern Working Men"). On 31 July 1881, itcarried a contradictory report from another source. The latter stated that "Nihiliststook no part in the disorder," citing the union's appeal of April 27 and commentingon it. The item concluded: "It will be seen that it is based on Communism and thatthe Jews are informed, that it is not as Jews but as capitalists that they are hated,which may be a great consolation for the poor members of their community."54Krasnyi-Admoni, Materiały, p. 415; Byloe, 1904, no. 6, p. 153; Maksakov andNevskii, Iuzhnorusskie rabochie soiuzy, pp. 209,245; Koval'skaia, 1926,pp. 26, 85. Detained and indicted, Ivaniv denied his authorship of the appeal. Butwhen the police also seized the manuscript, Ivaniv admitted that he had printed itand defended its content. Balabanov, К istorii, pp. 109, 111, 113.55A document published in Krasnyi-Admoni, Materiały, p. 270, mentions ananonymous note on a scrap of paper about the pogrom in Ielysavethrad thatoccurred on 15 April 1881.