The World That Never Was (92 page)

15
The Revolution is Postponed

‘We can only rest quietly at Clairvaux and do our best to avoid dying of anaemia and dysentery,’ Miller quotes Kropotkin writing from prison, though Hulse remarks on his lack of green fingers as an experimental gardener. Kennan is the source for Russia’s regret that he survived to be freed and the diplomatic repercussions, police reports in TNA F7 12519–20 for July 1887 for British concern over his influence as an exile in London. My sense of the Dod Street riot and the ensuring trial derives primarily from McCarthy and Quail, and of Black Monday and Bloody Sunday from both Porter and Tsuzuki. The debate around the extent to which, for all his denials, Morris was an anarchist is a fascinating one, though there is space here only to note the contributions of Bantman, Cole, Thompson and Kinna, who also discusses his call to educate, his views on class conflict and society’s complacency, and the political trap of the Coercion Bill; Holroyd is the source for Shaw’s memories of ‘skedaddling’, Oliver for his remarks about the anarchism of the early Fabians. She also traces the early biographies of Nicoll and Samuels, to which Quail contributes, along with insights into tension between Charlotte Wilson and Lane concerning the title of his publication. Rowbotham, and Carpenter’s
My Days and Dreams
, are the source for the Commonwealth Café, whose location in an old debtors prison offered, she suggests, a reminder of the iniquities of capitalism. Beaumont contextualises Carpenter’s observation regarding the West End dinner party, the implied voyeurism of which, taken with his comments elsewhere regarding the ‘huge human creature’ that will one day ‘shrug its back and shake us into the dirt’, brings to mind the Kraken of Mackay. The effectiveness of the Salvation Army and the ban on fortune-telling are discussed in Fishman’s wonderful book on the East End. Regarding the People’s Palace, Garnett is interesting on how its social significance was perceived at the time, Beaumont on its philanthropic origins and literary context, while reference to Mrs Wilson’s curious prescience regarding the threat to Victoria is found in Oliver. The background to the rivalry of Jenkinson and Anderson is from Porter and Campbell, while my attention was drawn to the approving presence on documents of Salisbury’s ‘S’ by Robert’s review of the latter; Clutterbuck discusses the Fenian intrigues, Cook the role of Melville as port watcher: a task explored by Johnson. Porter, again, is the source for Ambassador Paget fingering Stammer as the Ripper, Deacon for Le Queux’s claim in
Things I Know
that Rasputin had indicated the guilt of an Okhrana agent named Nideroest, and
http://www.casebook.org/suspects/
for Vassily as a candidate. Clutterbuck alludes mysteriously to Special Branch suspicions of Fenian involvement in the Ripper murders, while Lowdes, whose website suggests that she has been prosecuted for publishing photographs of the un-redacted Special Branch ledgers to which she too had access, alleges the Branch’s own culpability. Fischer is the source for the hiring of ‘Murphy’ and ‘John’ by Rachkovsky’s agent Milewski. ‘Malatesta’s personal life remains to be written,’ writes Levy, lamenting the ‘scant outlines available in largely hagiographical works… scattered letters and… police spies’ on whose testimony, pending his own mooted biography of the Italian, I have to some extent relied; in addition to Nettlau and Dipaola, both Ruvira works consider his activities in Argentina, Jensen the troublesome Pini and Parmeggiani. Cahm and Hulse explore Kropotkin’s views on expropriation and his work towards ‘The Conquest of Bread’; Byrnes casts surprising light on Pobedonostsev’s passion for Morris and Novikoff’s role in indulging it; Pick illuminates Le Bon’s idealisation of medieval communes, whose role in the social vision of both Morris and Kropotkin warrants closer consideration than was here possible.

16
Deep Cover

The atmosphere of the Raincy house rented by Tikhomirov at the time of his son’s illness is described by him in
Vospominaniya;
a contemporary description of the Russian’s state of mind and history of nervous afflictions is found in Rosny’s ‘Nihilists in Paris’ in
Harper’s
, August 1891, and reflections on his apostasy in Gleason. Vakhrushev is the source for the role played by Rachkovsky in applying pressure, Fischer for Hansen’s part in publishing Tikhomirov’s confessions to compromise him; Agafonov, as well as discussing the second raid on the printing works, quotes the Okhrana chief on the ‘relationship of obligation to myself’ in which he placed Hansen for intelligence purposes, while Kennan considers Hansen’s background and reputation, and also examines Grand Duke Vladimir’s early expressions of interest in the Lebel repeating rifle. Tidmarsh probes the ideological reasons for Tikhomirov’s move, quoting his belief that the Russian ‘people has degenerated terribly’, and Maevsky who sees him turning equally on his old colleagues, ‘misfits…puerile and limited personalities’. The greatest defence of the revolutionaries against the slurs of
Why I Ceased
… came from Plekhanov, in
A New Champion of Autocracy
. Webb and André have illuminated the murky world of Parisian mysticism; the dates of de Mohrenheim’s visit to Clermont-Ferrand were, according to various press reports, 26 July and 10 August 1887. Casselle quotes d’Uzès’ opinion that Boulanger was a ‘wet rag’, and offers a panoramic overview of the 1889 Expo, from the Eiffel Tower, and those who criticised and thrilled to it, to the Palais des Machines, a ‘Hell of work where so many diabolical machines furiously gesticulate’; Sutcliffe too contributes to my sense of the event. Thomas is the source for Michel’s interest in argot and Esperanto, Varias for ‘the great hatching’ and the Volapük Congress; disagreements at the criminal anthropology congresses are covered by Harris. The account of the two socialist congresses is drawn from Tsuzuki, McCarthy, Bernstein, the files of the IISH on the Congrès International Ouvrier Socialiste de Paris, letters home from Carpenter in the Sheffield archives, and Joll’s
Second International;
his
Europe 1870
, the first book I ever read on the period, still informs my sense of the prevailing economic conditions. Reclus’ letter that advocates ‘love everyone’ is quoted by Clark and Martin, while my knowledge of Tarrida’s lecture on ‘anarchism without adjectives’ comes from B. Anderson. Poliakov credits the Franco-Russia rapprochement, in part, to Rachkovsky ‘showing that Catholic France and Orthodox Russia had to fight against a common Jewish enemy’, while Clarke explores fictional expectations of the next war. Goron’s memoirs conceal the duplicity of the French police in relation to the 1890 bomb plot but are interesting on its external circumstances;
Byloe
for 1908 sheds more light, as do the AN and APP files, and a number of studies drawn from them; R. Henderson refers to attempts by the conspirators’ defence lawyer, Millerand, to expose Rachkovsky and Hekkelman, though neither the court nor the press rose to the bait. Zuckerman quotes Zubatov’s advice on the informant as a ‘beautiful woman’: the scrawled draft of Rachkovsky’s letter to Hekkelman, held in the Okhrana archive at F10003 K162 P12a11a, required painstaking decipherment and is presented here, I believe, for the first time. Two views of Burtsev’s flight from Constantinople aboard the
Ashlands
are found in
The Times
of 19 and 20 January 1891, and Burtsev’s own
Chasing Agents Provocateurs;
whether or not the burly man who boarded the ship was Bint being a key point of variance.

17
The Russian Memorandum

The surface detail of Seliverstov’s assassination along with speculation about the perpetrator’s identity and motive are taken from British press reports in the
Daily Graphic, Justice
and
Commonweal
from late November 1890, and from APP file BA 878, which implicates both Padlweski, the pseudonym of Otto Hauser Dyzek, and Rochefort’s
L’Intransigeant
for abetting his escape. The suggestion that his death was ordered by Rachkovsky, with Jagolkovsky’s involvement, comes from
Byloe
for February 1918, while Brachev intimates Plehve’s suspicions on the same subject. It is agent Pépin who finds the old Communard to testify to the revolutionary death sentence passed on Seliverstov in Montreux a decade earlier;
Le Figaro
of 11 March 1890 that reports Kravchinsky in Washington, supposedly ‘exhibited’ by Kennan at the city’s zoological garden alongside Hartmann and Degaev. The APP file on ‘Krawtchinsky’ summarises his ‘Herculean strength’ despite his medium height, and suggests that he ‘represents very well what the English call a “gentleman”’: an impression consonant with Edward Garnett’s fanciful idea, quoted by R. Garnett that ‘A goddess fell in love with a bear – and so was born Stepniak’, who also refers to Olive’s comments about the ‘confidential’ tone in which the Russian delivered his speeches. The journalist who spends the night with ‘Stepniak’ is Earl Hodgson, out of which he spins a booklet. Senese, an important source for Kravchinsky’s career, quotes Hubert Bland as proposing in June 1888 that ‘Stepniak’ should lead the English socialists, while Saunders refers to his letter to Mrs Spence Watson. Hollingsworth examines the prehistory of the Society of Friends, with its first unproductive meeting in 1886, and he, Senese and Taratuta inform my understanding of its effective foundation in 1889. W. O. Henderson mentions Kennan meeting Volkhovsky and Lazarev on his visits to Siberia, while Byrnes is the source for his encounter with Pobedonostsev, who supposedly tried to read some Emerson every day. In addition to those mentioned above, Budd and Billington examine Kravchinsky’s reception by America’s literary society, Moser the composition of
Career of a Nihilist
, while the world of William Dean Howells is beautifully evoked by Cohen, whose book was a structural inspiration for this one, though notable for its elegance and concision. De Mohrenheim’s refusal to countenance offers of assistance during Russia’s famine is covered extensively in reports and clippings in his APP file, the
Gaulois
interview being dated 5 September 1892. The report of a Geneva brochure detailing Kravchinsky’s supposed sell-out to England was by ‘Agent Auguste’ on 16 April 1892 and is in the Russian’s APP file, while the Okhrana archives and Shirokova reveal the extent of the similar frauds and forgeries it carried out at this time. R. Henderson has unearthed important evidence in GARF regarding the date of the Russian Memorandum in the form of Durnovo’s draft; Senese notes
Obzor’s
glee at progress in shifting British public opinion. Engels’ prediction concerning the ‘energy and violence’ of an American revolution is from a letter of March 1892 to Hermann Schluter; the Okhrana’s interest in the United States and use of surveillance there are from Taratuta, who had access to files in GARF concerning the New York and London branches of the foreign agency whose contents have since disappeared. Burgoyne, writing journalistically in the immediate aftermath of Homestead, and Krause are my main sources for the battle with the Pinkertons, with sidelights from Trautmann, who treats Most’s various periods of imprisonment on Blackwell’s Island, his horsewhipping by Goldman for disparaging Berkman after the latter’s arrest, and accusations concerning his supposed plans to terrorise Chicago with dynamite during the World’s Fair. Concerning the Columbus centenary event itself, I have drawn on Larson and Gilbert; the cloud projections are from Costello, the economic and consumerist life of the city in Fogarty; I regretted the lack of space to consider W. T. Stead’s
When Christ Comes to Chicago
. Kimball deals with the ‘saddest news’ of the extradition law and the process that led to this conclusion.

18
Dynamite in the City of Light

For Rochefort’s experiences in London, including the confrontation in the carriage, his art donations and Boulanger’s visit, his
Adventures
and Roubaud are the source, but Williams and the police reports in his APP file, BA 1250, strip away much of the glamour of his exile, and regarding the general, Baylen adds detail. The suicide of Rochefort’s eldest son only four days before his departure from France is sidelined in his memoirs, just as the suicide a few years previously of a Swiss maid who was said to be the lover of both father and son: it added to a toll of those associated with him that had begun with the daughter of his alleged mistress, in 1872, already included both Joly brothers, and to which Boulanger and Jacques de Reinarch would soon be added. The Belgian casino visits and duels, the mysterious package at Boulanger’s funeral, his white hair and Hertz’s visit are all recorded by police agents, Norrit and Agent Z in particular, whose sources include Vaughan, the stand-in editor of Rochefort’s
L’Intransigeant
, who reveals details of paranoia concerning a vendetta against Constans, while ‘Dumont’ reports on his clandestine visits to France, allegedly with the assistance of Clemenceau. It was Sherry who many years ago first awoke my interest in the intrigue around the anarchist terror campaign, in light of Conrad’s fiction, and his study of ‘The Informer’ is even more revealing when set beside archival sources; Michel’s expression of dislike for ‘your’ Rochefort to d’Uzès is reported by the duc de Bruissac. Thomas and Michel’s own writings are the source for her life at this time, including suggestions of Vauvelle as an Orleanist spy, while the redacted Special Branch ledgers appear to suggest that Vauvelle was an informant for the British police too; Clutterbuck’s unrestricted access to this material reveals most fully Coulon’s employment under the cover name ‘Pyatt’. Porter presents a characteristically balanced view of Special Branch, but argues that those trained in unscrupulous Irish counter-subversion themselves subverted the liberal values of the period, creating a disjuncture with the ‘myth’ of limitless English hospitality that Bantman examines in light of its propaganda value to the French émigrés. It is Porter too who suggests a vested interest in the Walsall case for a Special Branch threatened with budget cuts; the comparison with Continental forces in this and their use of provocateurs comes from Stead, in the case of the Paris prefecture, and Carpenter, Moser and Keunings regarding the Belgian. In sketching a life of Melville, Cook hints at his more sinister side, but it is R. Henderson’s meticulous examination of the letter from Jolivard to Richter from the Okhrana archive (f 102, d 3, op 89 [1891] delo 4 ‘Svedeniia po Londonu’ ll. 80:1, 17 May 1891, 24 May 1891, cited by Henderson) that finally confirms Melville’s nefarious connivance with Rachkovsky: the latter’s pencil annotation of Richter as ‘mon pseudonym’ establishes the link. Many at the time thought Nicoll deranged to suggest that ‘It is only lately that English police agents have followed the example of their foreign associates in manufacturing plots’, although in
Commonweal
for February 1891 ‘our comrade Mendelsohn’ had warned of imminent ‘sham dynamite plots’ by the Russian police. Melville’s maverick tip-off to the Italian Embassy about Malatesta’s movements was discovered by Dipaola, though Coulon handed over at least one note about his presence among the marble-workers of Carrara: the claim at the time by the highly respectable Bruce Glasier that Coulon was ‘a spy in the pay of the French government’ surely underestimates his usefulness to the nebulous ‘International Police’. Following a path charted by Tsuzuki and Rowbotham, the Sheffield archives illuminated Carpenter’s unfortunate absences at the time when Charles and others there fell under the influence of Creaghe: his career is examined in O’Toole, who also explores Vaillant’s experience as a
peon
in Argentina. File MD 259 proved especially revealing about Carpenter’s championing of Charles, whose involvement with the bomb he excuses in
My Days and Dreams
as the action of one of those men who ‘having the love of humanity in their hearts…are able to believe in the speedy realisation of an era of universal goodwill’. According to
Hansard
, the questions were raised in the House between February and April 1892, the Liberal MP Cunninghame Graham especially vocal in challenging the possible involvement of agents provocateurs. Fleming and Herbert cast new light on the martyrology that the well-covered story of Ravachol’s terror spree and execution prompted; Rhodes describes Bertillon’s professionalism towards him as a photographic subject. Malatesta’s reactions, some from the APP, are examined by Levy; those of Reclus by B. Anderson (‘rare grandeur’), his
Correspondance
(‘the bombings will not prevent us’) and Clarke (‘end of an epoch’); Jensen, Cahm and Miller consider those of Kropotkin, who appears as a ‘white Christ’ in Wilde’s ‘De Profundis’ and about whose ‘saintliness’ Hulse quotes Shaw. Rouvaloff in
Lord Arthur Savile’s Crime
and the conflation of Zasulich and Perovskaya in the eponymous heroine of
Vera
reveal Wilde’s wider interest in the Russian revolutionaries, as does his
The Soul of Man Under Socialism;
like Wilde, Shaw consulted Kravchinsky over his
Arms and the Man
. Madox Ford describes the post-bomb hysteria in Paris, the Holborn restaurant and the Rossetti children, about whose desire for danger Olive Garnett writes, and whose hospitality towards expelled Italian anarchists interested the Home Office. Henry’s nickname of ‘microbe’ comes from Merriman’s excellent new biography, published only in time for cursory reference to be made, while the bouillon is in Harris, and the virologist-as-detective in Latour. The historical lineage of anarchism from the Gnostics through the Mazdaks to the Anabaptists was traced at the time by Garin; the openness of their organisation remarked upon by Dubois.