The Congress of Vilnius in 1906 and the congress of Kiev in 1907: the Attempts of the Polish Gentry from the Taken Lands to Establish a Common Political Platform During Elections to the Second and Third State Duma

Roman Jurkowski

The Congress of Vilnius in 1906 and

the congress of Kiev in 1907: the

Attempts of the Polish Gentry from

the Taken Lands to Establish a

Common Political Platform During

Elections to the Second and Third

State Duma

Echa Przeszłości 12, 123-141

Roman Jurkowski

THE CONGRESS OF VILNIUS IN 1906

AND THE CONGRESS OF KIEV IN 1907.

THE ATTEMPTS OF THE POLISH GENTRY FROM

THE TAKEN LANDS TO ESTABLISH A COMMON

POLITICAL PLATFORM DURING ELECTIONS

TO THE SECOND AND THIRD STATE DUMA

T he r ela tiv ely sm a ll P o lish g en try com m u n ities occupying n in e gu b ern iyas (h overn orates) o f W estern R u ssia w ere su c c e ssfu l in in tro d u cin g to th e F ir st S ta te D u m a g e n tr y 16 d e p u tie s o u t o f th e to ta l o f 84 m a n d a te s aw ard ed to th e reg io n 1. P o lish d e p u tie s v a s tly in flu en ced th e choice o f four d e p u tie s who w ere n o t la n d o w n e r s2. T h is w a s a h u g e a c h iev em en t, and th e P o lish g en try w ere h o p in g to r e p e a t t h a t su c c e ss in th e e le c tio n s to th e S econ d D u m a w h ich w ere b a sed on th e sa m e s e t o f s ta tu te s . T he e le c tio n s to th e F irst D u m a w ere la r g e ly im p rovised , and th e “c o n stitu tio n a l e n th u s ia s m ” o f ca n d i­ d a te s r e p r e se n tin g v a rio u s n a tio n a litie s in w e ste r n g u b ern iyas and th e e n ­ tire cou n try lack ed a specific p o litica l u n d erto n e. T he P o lish g en try fa iled to form o r g a n iza tio n s w h o se territo ria l rea ch e x ten d ed beyon d e lectio n co m m it­ t e e s a t th e d is tr ic t a n d g u b e r n iy a le v e l. P o lis h c o m m u n itie s w e r e c h a r a c ­ te r iz e d by a g e n e ra l u n ifo rm ity o f p o litica l v ie w s, an d th e ir p o te n tia l oppo­ n e n ts (s ta te a u th o r itie s, R u ssia n n a tio n a lists, L ith u a n ia n , U k r a in ia n and B e la r u ssia n n a tio n a lists) w ere e v e n le s s w e ll prep ared for th e electio n s. The situ a tio n b e g a n to ch a n g e ra p id ly a fter th e sh o rt-liv ed term o f th e F ir st D u m a. T he p resen ce o f tw o se p a ra te P o lish grou p s in th e D u m a sp urred th e

1 F o r m o re in fo rm a tio n a b o u t e lectio n s to th e S ta te D u m a a n d th e S ta te C ouncil, re fe r to: R. J u rk o w s k i, S u k c e sy i p o ra ż ki. Z ie m ia ń stw o p o lsk ie Z ie m Z a b r a n y c h w w yborach do D u m y

P a ń stw o w ej i R a d y P a ń s tw a 1 9 0 6 -1 9 1 3 , O lsz ty n 2009.

2 T h ey w e re C ath o lic p rie s ts : B ish o p E d w a rd R opp a n d F a th e r A n to n i Songajllo, a n d tw o p e a s a n t d e p u tie s: M ich al G otow iecki a n d M a rcin Ż ukow ski.

p o litica l p o la riza tio n o f th e P o lish gentry, in p a rticu la r in th e a sso cia ted in te lle c tu a l c o m m u n itie s o f V iln iu s, K iev and, to a sm a lle r e x te n t, M insk. T he em e rg en ce o f D zie n n ik W ileń sk i3 an d D zie n n ik K ijo w s k i4, d a ily n e w s p a ­ p ers w ith a stro n g n a tio n a l-d em o cra tic o rien ta tio n , a ccelera ted th is p rocess, a s d em o n stra te d by p r e ss d isp u te s o f g ro w in g freq u en cy and veh em en ce (m a in ly th e K iev D a ily and th e L ith u a n ia n C ourier in V iln iu s) con cern in g th e p o litica l program o f d e p u tie s from L ith u a n ia an d R u th en ia . D u rin g a sh o rt ele c tio n ca m p a ig n for th e Secon d D u m a (from 8 (21) J u ly 1906, th e d isso lu tio n o f th e F ir st D u m a , to J a n u a r y 1907, w h e n th e e le c tio n s for th e Secon d D u m a took p lace), P o lish p re ss title s p u b lish ed in V iln iu s, K iev and W arsaw fea tu red a n e x te n siv e d eb ate on w h e th e r th e d e p u tie s from L ith u a ­ n ia an d R u th e n ia sh o u ld jo in forces w ith th e C ircle o f th e P o lish K ingdom . P r z e m y sła w D ąb row sk i5 recen tly p re se n te d u s w ith a n accou n t o f th e N a tio ­ n a l D em o cra ts’ p o sitio n on th e m atter, b u t h is v ie w s se e m to be b ia se d by n ew sp a p ers sy m p a th iz in g w ith th e N a tio n a l D em ocrats. For th is rea so n , th is p ap er a tte m p ts to a n a ly ze th e p o litica l an d o rg a n iza tio n a l a sp e c ts o f tw o re so lu tio n s ad op ted d u rin g c o n stitu e n t co n g resses. T h e r eso lu tio n s are p re­ se n te d in A n n ex 1 and A n n ex 2.

T he N a tio n a l-D e m o c r a ts’ h e ig h te n e d p r e ss a c tiv ity forced co n serv a tiv e an d lo y a list circles w h ich con trolled th e v a s t m ajority o f th e P o lish g e n tr y to s ta te th e ir p o litica l v ie w s w ith g rea ter o p e n n e ss and p recision . T h is process fo stered th e em erg en ce o f id eological and p o litica l criteria w h ich could be ad op ted by a su c c e ssiv e group o f ca n d id a tes from th e T ak en L a n d s ru n n in g for th e Secon d D u m a. T he g e n tr y w ork in g for th e resp ectiv e g u b ern iy a s’ e lectio n co m m itte es d ecided to org a n ize m e e tin g s w h ere th e y could co n so li­ d ate th eir v ie w s and actio n p lan s. T h e co n se rv a tiv e m em b ers o f th a t com m u ­ n ity w ere h o p in g to d em o n stra te th a t by o u tn u m b erin g th e N a tio n a l D em o ­ cra ts, th e y w ou ld e m erg e a s th e v ictors in th e u p com in g e le c tio n s6. O rgan i­ za tio n a l m a tte r s w ere o f e q u a l im p ortan ce. P o lish g e n tr y r e p r e se n ta tiv e s 3 T h e p ro m o tio n a l issu e cam e o u t on 6 (19) J u l y 1906, a n d th e f irs t r e g u la r issu e - on (14) S e p te m b e r 1906. Cf.: R. J u rk o w s k i, “K u rie r L ite w s k i” w la ta c h 1 9 0 5 -1 9 0 7 , “K w a rta ln ik H isto rii P r a s y P o lsk ie j”, R. XXII, (1983), No. 1, p. 89.

4 T h e firs t issu e w a s p u b lis h e d on 1 (14) F e b r u a ry 1906. Cf.: M. K o rzeniow ski, Z a Z ło tą

B ra m ą , D z ia ła ln o ść sp o łe cz n o -ku ltu r a ln a P o la kó w w K ijow ie w la ta c h 1 9 0 5 -1 9 2 0 , L u b lin 2009,

pp. 2 5 7 -2 7 8 .

5 P. D ąb ro w sk i, N a ro d o w a D e m o kra cja byłego W ielkiego K się stw a L itew skieg o , S t u d iu m

z za k r e s u m y ś li p o lity c z n e j i d z ia ła ln o ś ci obozu narodow ego n a z ie m ia c h lite w sk o -b ia ło ru skich w la ta c h 1 8 9 7 -1 9 1 8 , K ra k ó w 2010, pp. 2 0 7 -2 3 0 .

6 I n a n a n a ly s is o f th e V iln iu s co n g ress, P. D ą b ro w sk i (ibidem , p. 222) w ro te t h a t “th e te x t s o m e w h a t c h an g e d th e N a tio n a l D e m o c ra ts’ view s a b o u t th e so lid a rity o f P o lish d e p u tie s in th e S ta te D u m a ”, w h ic h is a c e rta in sim p lific a tio n b e c a u se th e N a tio n a l D e m o c ra ts’ d e cisio n w a s n o t in flu e n ce d b y th e “te x t” b u t r a th e r b y th e fact t h a t th e y c o n s titu te d a m in o rity a m o n g th e g e n try . T h ey w e re also a m in o rity a t th e co n g ress w h e re re so lu tio n s w e re p a s s e d by a sim ple m a jo rity vote. T h re e N a tio n a l D e m o c ra ts w e re o u tv o te d by 20 m e m b e rs o f th e g en try . T he a u th o r a lso e rro n e o u s ly s p e lls th e f ir s t n a m e o f F a t h e r D ru c k i-L u b e c k i (c o rre c t v e rsio n : H ie ro n im ) a n d th e la s t n a m e o f K a z im ierz K aczk o w sk i (n o t “K u czk o w sk i”).

from n in e gu b ern iy a s w ere able to co n v en e on ly a fter th e a n n o u n cem en t o f electo ra l la w s for th e B u lh y g in D u m a and th e O ctober M a n ifesto o f 17 (30) O ctober 1905. T he g e n tr y w ere h o p in g to d eb ate on th e e sta b lis h m e n t o f a C en tral E le c tio n s O ffice coverin g th e n in e g u b ern iyas, th e m eth o d s o f fin a n c in g th e o p eration o f e lectio n c o m m ittees a s w e ll a s L ith u a n ia n and R u th e n ia n r e p r e se n ta tio n in P etersb u rg . T h ose w ere th e m a in ob jectives o f th e V iln iu s C on gress o f 6 - 7 (1 9 - 2 0 ) D ecem b er 1906. S im ila r top ics w ere d isc u sse d in K iev on 1 - 2 (1 4 -1 5 ) S ep tem b er 1907, w h ile th e V iln iu s C on­ g r e ss o f 8 - 9 (2 1 -2 2 ) J a n u a r y 1908 d eb ated m a in ly on fin a n c ia l m a tte r s and fa iled to ad op t a n y form al reso lu tio n s.

I. P o litic a l is s u e s

T he r e so lu tio n p u b lish ed a fter th e V iln iu s co n g ress co n ta in ed g u id e lin e s for th ree ca teg o ries o f e lec tio n co m m itte es a t th e m u n icip a l, d istrict and gu b ern iya lev el. In lin e w ith th e se reco m m en d a tio n s, th e se le c te d ca n d i­ d a tes, electo rs and d e p u tie s h ad to o fficially com ply w ith th e p rovision s d e ta iled in six p ara g ra p h s o f th e r e so lu tio n (cf. A n n ex No. 1). U n d e r p a ra ­ g ra p h s 1 and 4, th e c a n d id a te s h ad to accep t th e c o n stitu tio n a l m on arch y sy ste m (§1) an d su p p ort m e a su r e s a im in g to d evelop a n in te r n a l sy ste m o f s ta te ru le (§4 - d e c e n tr a liz a tio n and territo ria l self-g o v ern m en t). P aragrap h 2 m ad e a g e n era l referen ce to “c o n stitu tio n a l freed om s” g u a r a n te e d to R u s­ sia n c itiz e n s a fter 17 (30) O ctober 1905 (eq u al tr e a tm e n t for m em b ers o f v a rio u s n a tio n a l and re lig io u s groups). P rop erty r ig h ts and o w n ersh ip la w s in ag ricu ltu re w ere d iscu ssed in §3. T h e la s t tw o p ara g ra p h s (§5 and §6) concerned th e r e p r e se n ta tio n o f P o lish co m m u n ities liv in g in L ith u a n ia and R u th e n ia in th e D u m a. W h ile th e p ro v isio n s o f §5 w h ich a d v ised th e d ep u ­ tie s from L ith u a n ia and R u th e n ia to jo in forces w ith r e p r e se n ta tiv e s o f oth er n a tio n a l grou p s did n o t stir h e ig h te n e d em o tio n s7, p a ragrap h 6, w h ich rec­ om m en d ed th a t “P o lish Circle d e p u tie s abide b y th e p rin cip le o f m u tu a l su p p ort and so lid a rity in e x te r n a l actio n ” spurred a lo n g -term d eb ate. The con flict w a s a p p ea sed on ly in 1912 w h e n th ree o f th e five d e p u tie s e lected for th e F o u rth D u m a w ere m em b ers o f th e N a tio n a l D em ocratic Party. The v a g u e n e s s o f th e se p ro v isio n s su p p orted th e fo rm u la tio n o f v a rio u s op in ion s, in c lu d in g A lek sa n d e r C h o m ih sk i’s s ta te m e n t w h ich w a s rea d ily cited by J ó z e f H la sk o , e d ito r -in -ch ief o f D zie n n ik W ileń ski, n a m e ly th a t “th e con gress m ad e it a b so lu te ly clea r th a t a n u n d e r sta n d in g sh ou ld be reach ed w ith th e Circle o f th e P o lish K in gd om ”8. T he n o tio n o f “so lid a rity in e x te r n a l actio n ” 7 B efore th e elections to th e F ir s t D um a, T he p rin c ip a l declaration o f P o lish n a tio n a l election

com m ittees in the K in g d o m o f P oland, L ith u a n ia a n d R u th e n ia d u rin g the fir s t elections to the representative assem bly o f the R u ssia n S ta te spoke of “local fractio n s” of th e P olish C ircle ra th e r

th a n a se p a ra te circle of d e p u ties from L ith u a n ia a n d R u th e n ia (P. D ąbrow ski, op. cit. p. 211). 8 J . H lask o , Po zje zd zie w ile ń sk im , “D z ie n n ik W ile ń sk i”, No. 94 of 21 D ecem b er 1906 (2 J a n u a r y 1907).

produced sim ila r in te r p r e ta tio n d ifficu lties. E v ery sp eech d elivered by m e m ­ b ers o f th e P o lish Circle or th e C ircle o f D e p u tie s from L ith u a n ia an d R uthe- n ia in th e D u m a c o n stitu te d “ex te r n a l a ctio n ”, th erefore, a ll s ta te m e n ts and sp e e c h e s w ere a cts o f solidarity, w h ile “m u tu a l su p p ort” could ap p ly to a ll or se le c te d m a tte r s on th e agen d a. T he above also a llo w ed a v a s t freedom of in terp reta tio n .

T h ere are no su r v iv in g records o f th e th ree m e e tin g s in V iln iu s. The lacon ic referen ce in E d w ard W oyn illow icz’s m e m o irs d oes n o t con trib u te any v a lu a b le in fo rm a tio n 9. A b r ie f rep ort on th e V iln iu s co n g ress, d eliv ered by co u n t K sa w ery O rłow ski on 13 (26) D ecem b er 19 0 6 a t a m e e tin g o f th e E lectio n C o m m ittee o f th e P o d o lia n G u b ern iya10, is m u ch m ore in form ative. A ccording to th e report, th e P o lish E le ctio n C om m ittee o f th e V iln iu s Gu- b ern iy a in itia te d a d eb ate on th e self-p rop osed r e so lu tio n o f 2 3 O ctober (5 N ovem b er) 1906 c o n ta in in g 18 p o stu la te s (w ith a d d itio n a l su b -p oin ts) w h ich c o n stitu te d th e co m m itte e ’s ele c tio n p rogram 11. “Mr. W oyniłłow icz and Mr. K orw in M ile w sk i g a v e h a r sh criticism to th e proposed reso lu tio n . T h ey a rgu ed t h a t th e r e so lu tio n h a d b e e n d rafted in e x c e ssiv e d e ta il an d th a t it offered a v a r ie ty o f m a n d a ts im p e r a tifs w h ich w ou ld tie our d e p u tie s’ h a n d s, tu r n in g th e m in to m ere p a w n s in th e p o litica l g am e. T h ey objected to su ch m a n d a te s an d argu ed th a t th e m eth o d h a d p roven to be q u ite u s e le s s and h a rm fu l d u rin g D u m a se ssio n s. T he P o lish Circle w a s d ep rived of d ecisio n ­ m a k in g pow ers, and it h ad to c o n su lt a ll im p o rta n t m a tte r s w ith th e cen tra l office o f th e N a tio n a l-D em o cra tic P a r ty in W arsaw. T h is procedure led to errors. T h e d isc u ssio n ab ou t P o la n d ’s au to n o m y w a s co m p letely [th is word w a s cro ssed o u t in p en cil - R. J.] b a d ly tim ed an d p r e se n te d in a n in ap p ro­ p ria te m anner, w h ich is w h y it receiv ed a v ery cold w elcom e a t th e D um a. T he r e so lu tio n w a s a lso criticized on accou n t o f it s len g th . T he electio n p latform for our g u b ern iyas sh o u ld be la id o u t in a su ccin ct fa sh io n to co n ta in o n ly th e m o st im p o rta n t p o stu la te s, w h ile p rovid in g th e d e p u tie s w ith ex te n siv e freedom o f action”12. The report su g g e sts th a t m e e tin g p artici­ p a n ts su b scrib ed to th e o p in io n s o f E. W oyniłłow icz and H. K orw in -M ilew sk i.

9 H e w rote: “T hose congresses w ere a lw ays m ark e d by th e em ergence of tw o com pletely opposite m ovem ents: a n «all-Polish» tre n d w hich received its slogans from th e N a tio n a l D em ocratic P a r ty in th e K ingdom of P oland, a n d a «domestic» m ovem ent t h a t accounted for th e local specificity a n d n a tio n a l id en tity of th e T ak en L an d s a n d w a s m ore ideologically sim ilar to th e « party of realists» a n d «loyalists». (E. Woyniłłowicz, W spom nienia 1847-1928, p a rt 1, W ilno 1931, p. 173).

10 P ro to kó ł p o sie d ze n ia p o lskieg o p o d o lskieg o k o m ite tu g u b ern ia ln e g o z d n ia 13 G r u d n ia

1906 r w W innicy, in: Polscy wielcy właściciele ziem scy n a Podolu a D u m a P a ń stw o w a 1906 -1 9 0 7 i R a d a P a ń s tw a 1 9 0 7-1909. M a ter ia ły zeb ra n e p r z e z K a lik s ta D u n in -B o rko w sk ie g o , J a g ie llo n ia n

L ib rary , M a n u s c rip t D e p a rtm e n t, R k p s 7989 IV, k . 5 1 -5 6 .

11 A k c ja g u b e r n ia ln a w ile ń sk a . P o w sta n ie i o rg a n iza cja P olskiego G ub ern ia ln eg o K o m ite tu

W yborczego W ileńskiego. U c h w a ła W ileńskiego P olskiego G ub ern ia ln eg o K o m ite tu Wyborczego z d n ia 2 3 p a ź d z ie r n ik a 1906 ro ku , “K u rie r L itew sk i”, No. 246 of 29 O ctober (11 N ovem ber) 1906.

12 P ro to kó ł p o sie d ze n ia p o lskieg o p o d o lskieg o k o m ite tu g u b ern ia ln e g o z d n ia 13 G r u d n ia

A sp ecia l com m ittee resp o n sib le for d raftin g th e “e lec tio n p latform ” w a s ap p oin ted . Its perform ance w a s d isc u sse d a t th e fo llow in g m e e tin g and “th e fin a l ed ito ria l w ork w a s e n tr u ste d to Mr. M ilew sk i to e n su r e th e p latform ’s com p lian ce w ith le g a l re q u ir e m e n ts”1 3. K sa w ery O rłow sk i a lso rem ark ed on th e p ro v isio n s o f §§2, 5 and 6 o f th e V iln iu s resolu tion : “th e in str u c tio n s for territo ria l grou p s and th e ir re la tio n s w ith th e P o lish Circle w ere m od eled on th e reg u la tio n s o f our C ircle in V ie n n a and th e r u le s o f P. circles [“P.” probably d en o tes “P o lish ” - R.J] in th e S ta te C ouncil. D u rin g a d eb a te on th e eq u a l tr e a tm e n t o f v a r io u s n a tio n a litie s, no rese r v a tio n s w ere m ad e a g a in st th e J e w s ”14.

E. W oynillow icz and H. K orw in -M ilew sk i th u s con trib u ted to th e form u­ la tio n o f a com p en d iou s e lectio n p latform , and th e la tte r w a s also resp o n sib le for th e fin a l sh a p e o f th e six p ara g ra p h s o f th e V iln iu s reso lu tio n . In v ie w o f later role th e played by th ose tw o gentry m em bers in th e S tate Council and th e P olish political com m unity, E. W oynillowicz’s criticism o f th e V ilnius G uberniya C o m m ittee’s program stem m ed from h is “p ractical and civ il” approach to p olitics. H e w a s on ly too aw are t h a t m em b ers o f th e P o lish g e n tr y w ere in clin ed to d iscu ssio n , con flict and h a ir -sp littin g , and h e could h a v e b ee n afraid th a t a h ig h ly sp ecific program (su ch a s t h a t proposed on 23 O ctober (5 N ovem b er) 1906) w ould d ivid e and w e a k e n th e P o lish co m m u n ity before th e fo llow in g electio n s. T h is e x p la in s w h y h e lobbied for a sh o rt and h ig h ly g en era lize d reso lu tio n . W h ile H . K orw in -M ilew sk i could h a v e b een gu id ed by a sim ila r logic, h e h eld h is p o litica l sk ills in very h ig h e ste e m , th erefore, a h ig h ly sp ecific ele c tio n program w ith str ic t in str u c tio n s for p a rlia m en ta ry con d u ct w ou ld sig n ific a n tly restr ic t h is freedom . K o rw in -M ilew sk i w ould n ev e r c o n se n t to su ch a so lu tio n , w h ich d irectly led to h is d ism issa l from th e p o st o f V iln iu s d ep u ty in th e S ta te C ouncil in 1 9 0 8 -1 9 0 9 . In 1909, the V iln iu s g en try g ra n ted to K orw in -M ilew sk i a sp e cia l p riv ileg e to sp ea k in d i­ v id u a lly (w ith o u t th e prior approval of L ith u a n ia n and R u th e n ia n C ircles) in th e S ta te C o u n cil15.

It q u ick ly b ecam e a p p a ren t th a t th e V iln iu s r e so lu tio n w a s n o t a gold en m ea su re. A s is u s u a lly th e ca se, it a ttra cted b o th p ra ise and criticism . To g iv e m ore p recisio n to §6 o f th e V iln iu s reso lu tio n , it w a s fu rth er ex p an d ed d u rin g th e co n g ress in K iev “to avoid in te r p r e ta tio n s th a t are in c o n siste n t w ith th e sp ir it and th e orig in a l in te n tio n o f V iln iu s re so lu tio n s”. T he follow ­

13 Ibidem .

14 Ib id em . K. O rło w sk i re fe rs to “te r r ito r ia l g ro u p s” in th e p lu ra l. T h is im p lies t h a t th e P o les in th e reg io n o f P o d o lia e x p ec te d th e c o n s titu e n ts from L ith u a n ia a n d R u th e n ia to form tw o s e p a ra te g ro u p s, w h ile th e g e n try in n o rth -w e s te rn g u b e rn iy a s a lw a y s looked to th e C ircle of D e p u tie s fro m L ith u a n ia a n d R u th e n ia a s a sin g le g ro u p a n d j u x ta p o s e d it a g a in s t th e P o lish C ircle fro m th e K ingdom . T h e above im p lies s tro n g re g io n a l s e p a ra tis m w h ic h b ecam e even m o re c le a rly m a n ife s te d d u rin g th e e s ta b lis h m e n t of th e c o n stitu e n c y office in P e te rs b u rg .

15 F o r a d e ta ile d d e sc rip tio n a n d a n a n a ly s is of H ip o lit K o rw in -M ilew sk i’s effo rts d u rin g e lectio n s to th e S ta te C ouncil a n d h is c o n d u ct in th is h o u se of th e R u s s ia n p a rlia m e n t, re fe r to: R. J u rk o w s k i, S u k c e sy i p o ra ż k i..., pp. 337, 3 5 4 -3 6 7 , 3 7 4 -3 7 7 , 3 8 1 -3 8 4 .

in g p r o v isio n s w ere added: 1) it w a s u n a n im o u sly d ecided th a t d e p u tie s from L ith u a n ia an d R u th e n ia “sh o u ld crea te a se p a ra te and a n u n co n d itio n a lly a u to n o m o u s circle”. T h ey sh o u ld be able to ch oose w h e th e r th e y w a n te d to in itia te a n y actio n “in so lid a r ity w ith th e Circle o f th e P o lish K in gd om ” and on th e “p rin cip le o f m u tu a l recip rocity” in m a tte r s p e r ta in in g to “P o lish n a tio n a l in te r e s ts ”, and in a n y oth er m a tte r s - “a t th e d iscretio n o f th e Circle o f P o lish D e p u tie s from L ith u a n ia an d R u th e n ia ” (cf. A n n ex N o . 2 ). 2) T h is “so lid a rity on th e p rin cip le o f m u tu a l recip rocity” w a s fu rth er r estricted by “v ita l in te r e s ts o f our cou n try ” w h ich , a lth o u g h secon d to “th e g e n era l n e ed s o f th e P o lish n a tio n ”, proved to be m ore im p o rta n t th a n “P o lish n a tio n a l a ffa irs” b eca u se “our d e p u tie s sh o u ld su p p ort a ll in itia tiv e s o f th e P o lish C ircle th a t do n o t s ta n d in o p p osition to th e in te r e s ts o f our C ou n try”. The above s ta te m e n t em p h a siz e d th e fu ll au to n o m y o f th e L ith u a n ia n and Ru- th e n ia n C ircle, w h ile th e “so lid a rity o f th e tw o circles in m a tte r s p e rta in in g to P o lish n a tio n a l in te r e s ts ”, o ften p o stu la te d by p ress title s sy m p a th iz in g w ith th e N a tio n a l D em ocrats, w a s n o th in g m ore th a n th e P o lish g e n tr y ’s d ecla ra tio n o f su p p ort for th e P o lish C ircle’s p o stu la te s an d projects con cern ­ in g m a in ly th e K ingdom o f P olan d (u n le ss th e y “stood in o p p osition to th e in te r e s ts o f our C ou n try”, w h ich w a s a h ig h ly g e n e ra lized form ula).

D u rin g th e K iev co n g ress, th e in te r p r e ta tio n o f th e p ro v isio n s o f §6 th e V iln iu s re so lu tio n w a s a c tu a lly exp a n d ed , an d th is a cco m p lish m en t w a s a su c c e ss o f th e co n serv a tiv e fraction o f P o lish la n d o w n ers. It ev o k ed p ro test from th e N a tio n a l D e m o cra ts a tte n d in g th e co n g ress a s w e ll a s se v e r a l la n d ­ o w n ers w ho w ere n o t p a rty m em b ers b u t w ere resp o n sib le for co m m u n ica ­ tio n b e tw e e n th e tw o P o lish circles in th e D u m a . M arcin C h ełch o w sk i and co u n t W aw rzyniec P u ttk a m er, th e m o st o u tsta n d in g m em b ers o f th e N a tio n ­ al D em ocratic P a rty in th e V iln iu s guberniya, decreed th e K iev r e so lu tio n to be “d eficien t an d n o t su fficie n tly con d u cive to th e p rom otion o f so lid a rity ”. T h ey w ere jo in ed by B r o n isła w U m ia sto w sk i and B o le sła w J a ło w ie c k i16, both official d e le g a te s o f th e V iln iu s g u b ern iya. In th e ir v o tu m sep a ra tu m , th e y u n d erlin ed th a t th e ir ob jection s to th e am en d ed §6 o f th e V iln iu s reso lu tio n r e su lte d from “d iffu se n e ss an d a m b ig u ity o f th e ed ite d te x t w h ich could lea d to th e m isin te r p r e ta tio n o f th e e sse n c e o f so lid a rity b e tw e e n th e Circle o f P o lish D e p u tie s from L ith u a n ia and R u th e n ia and th e C ircle o f R oyal D e p u ­ t ie s ”. N e e d le s s to say, th e a u th o r s n e v er d efin ed th e “e sse n c e o f so lid a rity ” or its p ractical im p lic a tio n s17. T he th ir d group o f d e le g a te s w ho r a ised objec­

16 Bolesław Jałow iecki did n ot even sym pathize w ith th e N atio n al D em ocrats, b u t h e supported cooperation betw een th e tw o circles for p u re ly practica l reaso n s. H e believed th a t by jo in in g forces, th e tw o g roups w ould sta n d g re a te r ch an g es in elections a n d p a rlia m e n ta ry alliances.

17 P. D ą b ro w sk i q u o te s a n a rtic le in D z ie n n ik W ileń ski (U c h w a ła z ja z d u k ijo w sk ieg o , No. 202 o f 5(18) S e p te m b e r 1907) a b o u t a m e e tin g o f co n g ress p a r tic ip a n ts w ho p ro te s te d a g a in s t o r w e re opposed to th e e x p a n d e d c o n te n t of §6. I n th is c o n tex t, h e m e n tio n s H e n ry k D ym sza, a lth o u g h D y m sz a h a d n e v e r e x p ress ed a n y r e m a r k s or o b jections on th e lis t of s ig n a ­ to rie s p r in te d in th e official te x t o f th e re so lu tio n (cf.: P olscy w ielcy w łaściciele zie m sc y na

tio n s to th e a m en d ed v e r sio n o f §6 o f th e V iln iu s r e so lu tio n com prised S ta n is ła w H o rw a tt and K azim ierz K aczk ow sk i, m em b ers o f th e K iev gu- b ern iya co m m ittee. A lth o u g h th e y v o ted for th e a m en d m en ts, th e y also re­ m ark ed th a t th e “Circle o f P o lish D e p u tie s from L ith u a n ia an d R u th e n ia m a y ex e rcise au to n o m y on ly u n d er ex tra o rd in a ry c ir cu m sta n ces and in th e la s t reso rt”. T h is s ta te m e n t w a s m ore o f a reflectio n on th e N D P ’s pow erful in flu e n c e on th e K iev g u b ern y ia com m ittee th a n a n ex p r e ssio n o f th e d e le ­ g a te s ’ p erso n a l v iew s.

A s it could be ex p ec ted in th e lig h t o f §6 of th e V iln iu s reso lu tio n , N a tio n a l-D em o cra tic p r ess w a s le s s critical. S im ila r ly to th e above N D P a c tiv ists from th e V iln iu s guberniya, J ó z e f H ła sk o also criticized th e a m b ig u ­ ity o f th e so lid a rity p rovision “w h ich could le a d to sk ir m ish e s, m a k in g th e ta sk e v e n m ore d ifficu lt for our d e p u tie s”18. D z ie n n ik K ijo w s k i fo rm u la ted its o p in ion s m ore openly: “regrettab ly, th is in te r p r e ta tio n is n o t q u ite su c cessfu l in reco n cilin g o p p o sites”, b u t it also a tte m p te d to id en tify th e com m on areas b e tw e e n th e P o lish g e n tr y and th e N D P : “d esp ite poor e d itin g , it u n d o u b ted ­ ly e m p h a siz e s th a t th e tw o circles w ill jo in forces in a ll m a tte r s p e r ta in in g to v ita l P o lish in te r e sts. T he d e p u tie s from th e e a ste r n terr ito ries w ou ld ta k e in d e p e n d e n t actio n o n ly if th e P o lish C ircle’s d ecisio n s stood in o p p osition to th e in te r e s ts o f our co u n try ”19. T he re a so n s for th is h ig h ly re str ic tiv e com ­ m e n ta ry in N a tio n a l-D em o c ra tic p ress, w h ich w a s ren ow n ed for its h ig h ly a g g r e ssiv e sta n c e to w a rd s c o n ser v a tiv e d e p u tie s20, la y else w h e r e , an d I w ill m e n tio n th em to w a rd s th e en d of th is sub-chapter.

A lth o u g h th e reso lu tio n s ad op ted b y b oth co n g r e sse s a ttra cted m o st crit­ icism from th e c o m m u n ities sy m p a th iz in g w ith th e N a tio n a l D em o cra ts w ho opposed th e con cep t o f a civ il so ciety an d a ccen tu a ted its “P o lis h n e s s ”, sk e p ­ tic a l v o ices w ere a lso h ea rd a m on g th e lo y a lists w ho argu ed th a t th e V iln iu s re so lu tio n “w a s fou n d ed on n a tio n a listic an d n o t civ il gro u n d s”. T h is far- re a ch in g in te r p r e ta tio n o f th e V iln iu s r e so lu tio n (w h ich m a d e no referen ces to th e P o lish n e ss o f e lec tio n c o m m itte es or th e e le c tio n o f c o n stitu e n ts w ho w ere P o lish n a tio n a ls - cf. A n n ex No. 2) w a s p roposed by th e d istrict electio n co m m ittee in K au n as. In a r e so lu tio n o f 30 J a n u a r y (12 F eb ru ary) 1907, “K a u n a s d e le g a te s’ d ecisio n to sig n th e ap p ea l o f th e P o lish g en try r e p r e se n t­ in g n in e g u b e rn y ia s d u rin g th e V iln iu s co n g ress w a s d eem ed a s inappropri- a te ”21. T h e rea so n s for th e above w ere com p lex an d th e y stem m ed from th e

18 J . H łask o , U ch w a ła Z ja z d u k ijo w sk ieg o , “D z ie n n ik W ile ń sk i”, No. 203 o f 6 (19) S e p te m ­ b e r 1907.

19 U ch w a ły K ijo w skie, in tro d u c tio n , “D z ie n n ik K ijow ski”, No. 202 o f 6 (19) S e p tem b e r 1907.

20 I n 1 9 0 7 -1 9 0 9 , th e N a tio n a l D e m o cra ts w e re en g ag e d in a conflict w ith th e P o lish D om estic A lliance in R u th e n ia . (R. J u rk o w s k i, P o lskie S tro n n ic tw o K rajow e n a R u s i 1 9 0 7 -1 9 0 9 , “E c h a P rzeszło ści”, vol. X, (2009), pp. 1 9 1 -2 1 9 .

21 M. B r.[en sztejn ], K ow no, p ra w y b o ry z ie m ia ń sk ie , “K u rie r L ite w sk i”, No. 26 o f 2 (15) F e b r u a ry 1907.

e lectio n str a te g y o f th e K a u n a s g e n tr y w ho w ere h o p in g to so lic it th e su p p ort o f p o litica lly u n d ecid ed L ith u a n ia n s by prom otin g to lo y a list slo g a n s22. T h is g a v e rise to th e sh o rt-liv ed con cep t o f th e “n on -cu rial p rin cip le” w h ich aim ed to e n su r e th a t ch u rch cu ria s sele c te d c a n d id a te s from d istr ic ts o u tsid e th e r e sp ectiv e cu ria in p a rlia m e n ta r y electio n s. T he d e p u tie s w ere to be selected on accou n t o f “th e ir a b ility and ch a ra cter”23 ra th er th a n n a tio n a lity or social s ta tu s. For th is rea so n , th e criticism g iv e n to th e “n a tio n a listic ” reso lu tio n s adopted a t th e V iln iu s co n g ress q u ick ly su b sid ed a fter th e P o lish d ep u ties from K a u n a s had lo st th e e le c tio n s to th e Second D u m a.

T he P od olia g en try b eg a n to h a v e doubts. D u rin g a p re-electio n m e e tin g in th e gu b ern iya on 3 (16) F eb ru ary 1907, th e y in q u ired w h y th e word “P o lish ” had b e e n o m itted in th e title o f th e V iln iu s program . C ou n t K sa w ery O rłow ski, th e m e e tin g ch airm an , g a v e th e fo llow in g exp lan ation : “th e title h a s b e e n develop ed by d e le g a te s from gu b ern iya c o m m ittees, and ea c h com ­ m itte e ch ose to op erate u n d er a d ifferen t n a m e. M an y c o m m ittees h ad m ixed com p osition , and th eir d e le g a te s could n o t com e to a n a g r e e m e n t on th e program ’s title . C om in g from P olan d , ch a u v in ism w ou ld be g ro ssly o u t of p lace in referen ce to so m e th in g a s tr iv ia l a s a title , b eca u se th e en tire program clea rly a s s e r ts th e p a r tic ip a n ts’ P o lish n e ss and th e fact th a t it had b e e n d evelop ed for th e P o le s”24. T he d isc u ssio n a t th e m e e tin g in d ic a te s th a t th e P o d o lia g en try h ad very lim ite d k n ow led ge ab ou t n a tio n a listic and p o liti­ cal r e la tio n s in L ith u a n ia n and B e la r u sia n g u b ern iy a s. G en try m em b er W acław S k ib n ie w sk i e m p h a siz e d th a t “L ith u a n ia ab id es by d ifferen t r e la ­ tio n s, it h a s a d ifferen t com p osition o f n a tio n a l groups. In L ith u a n ia , c o n sti­ tu tio n a l-d em o cra tic p rin cip les do n o t p ose a th r e a t for n a tio n a listic id e a s, and a v o te b a sed on four d em ocratic p rin cip les is p o ssib le ”. In L ith u a n ia , B e la r u s and U k ra in e , a v o te b a sed on th o se p rin cip les w ould co m p letely e lim in a te th e P o lish m in o rity from ev ery platform o f pu b lic life. S k ib n iew sk i ask ed th e ch a irm a n and th e P od olia d e leg a te to th e V iln iu s c o n g ress “w h a t g u a r a n t e e is th e r e t h a t o u r u n io n w ith L ith u a n ia w ill n o t r e s u lt in a rift?”25. In h is answ er, K. O rłow ski em p h a size d th e str o n g e st bond b e tw een m em b ers o f th e P o lish g en try in R u th e n ia an d L ith u an ia: “w e sh a re the sa m e v ie w s on th e a g ricu ltu ra l problem . T h e V iln iu s co n g ress w a s o f th e op in ion th a t m em b ers o f territo ria l circles w ere n o t a llow ed to jo in R u ssia n p o litica l p a rties. T he above could n o t h a v e b e e n co n ta in ed in th e program for a v a r ie ty o f r e a so n s”. H is rep ly cu t th e d isc u ssio n short. C ou n t O rłow ski argued th a t th e v a g u e n e ss and te r s e n e s s o f th e V iln iu s r e so lu tio n w a s d ic ta t­ ed by “th e L ith u a n ia n s’ c a u tio n and fear o f b e in g a tta ck ed b y v a r io u s

par-22 I h a v e d isc u sse d th is in d e ta il in: S u k c e s y i p o ra żki..., pp. 1 6 8 -1 6 9 , 435.

23 M. B r.[en sztejn ], A k c ja w yborcza w g u b e r n i ko w ie ń sk iej, K L, No. 27 of 4 (17) F e b ru a ry 1907.

24 P olscy w ielcy w łaściciele zie m sc y n a P od o lu ..., k . 85. 25 Ib id em , k. 86.

t ie s ”26. T he fo llow in g r e so lu tio n w a s adopted u n a n im o u sly : “P o lish v o ters in P od olia a d v ise th e ir c o n stitu e n ts to abide by th e p o stu la te s o f th e V iln iu s re so lu tio n and se e k u n io n w ith th e Circle o f th e P o lish K in gd om ”27.

T he u n co n d itio n a l form ation o f a se p a ra te circle o f P o lish d e p u tie s from L ith u a n ia an d R u th en ia , a s decreed b y th e r e so lu tio n o f th e K iev con gress, w a s a h u g e b low for th e N a tio n a lis ts b oth in th e K ingdom and th e T aken L a n d s. In th is situ a tio n , th e N D P a c tu a lly b e n efited from th e v a g u e n e s s o f §6. J ó z e f H ła sk o , th e le a d in g N a tio n a l-D em o cra tic jo u r n a list in V iln iu s, p ra ised th e V iln iu s r e so lu tio n an d se a rch ed for w e a k n e s s e s in th e K iev re so lu tio n . B u t th e N D P p la y e d a m ore su b tle g a m e w h ich w a s n o t b a sed on m ere p ra ise or c r itic ism . T he N a tio n a l-D em o cra ts ch ose to p ra ise th e V iln iu s re so lu tio n o n ly a fter th e K iev co n g r ess h ad p u t a n en d to th e free in te r p r e ta ­ tio n o f th e r e la tio n s b e tw e e n th e tw o circles (or a t le a s t it s se le c te d a sp ects) th a t w a s a llo w ed u n d er th e v a g u e p ro v isio n s o f §6. B efore th e K iev con gress, N a tio n a l-D em o cra tic p r e ss str o n g ly criticized th e V iln iu s re so lu tio n for its fa ilu re to d irectly a d d ress th e m erger w ith th e P o lish C ircle. D e sp ite th e above, th e N a tio n a l D em o cra ts w ere r e lu c ta n t to a tta ck th e K iev reso lu tio n for a t le a s t tw o reason s: 1) th e y c o n stitu te d a m in o rity a m on g P o lish gu- b ern iya co m m itte es and P o lish d ep u ty grou p s from n in e gu b ern iyas, and e x c e ssiv e criticism o f th e K iev r e so lu tio n w ou ld co st th e m th e su p p ort o f pop u lou s g e n tr y co m m u n ities th a t h eld co n serv a tiv e v ie w s or sim p ly refu sed to accep t N a tio n a l-D em o cr a tic id ea s. For th is rea so n , th e criticism g iv e n by N a tio n a l-D em o cra tic d e p u tie s in K iev w a s to n ed dow n, an d it m erely p o in ted to th e re so lu tio n ’s le n g th y an d a m b ig u o u s ch a ra cter w h ich w a s “n o t su ffi­ cie n tly con d u cive to th e p rom otion o f so lid a rity ”. T he N a tio n a l-D em o cra ts did n o t d irectly criticize th e form ation o f a se p a ra te circle o f d e p u tie s from L ith u a n ia an d R u th e n ia or th e p r in cip les o f coop eration b e tw e e n b oth P o lish circles in th e D um a; 2) th e form er N a tio n a l-D em o cra tic d e p u tie s in th e Secon d D u m a (M. C h ełch ow sk i, M. W ę sła w sk i and W. P u ttk a m er), p u b lish ­ ers o f N a tio n a l-D em o cra tic n ew sp a p ers in V iln iu s and Kiev, w ere fu lly aw are th a t th e r ela tio n s b e tw e e n th e tw o P o lish circles in th e Secon d D u m a h ad b e e n far le s s o p tim istic th a n d escrib ed by N a tio n a l-D em o cra tic p r e ss28. T hey rea lized th a t th e K iev r e so lu tio n su m m a rized th e a ttitu d e s o f th e lo y a list

26 Ibidem . 27 Ib id em . k . 86.

28 P rz e m y s ła w D ą b ro w sk i h a d no kn o w led g e o f a rch iv e m a te ria ls from R u ss ia , a n d b a sin g h is view s on p re s s re p o rts a n d th e b ia s e d o p in io n s o f W łodzim ierz D w o rzaczek (in a s e rie s of a rtic le s in D z ie n n ik W ileń ski, la te r D z ie n n ik K ijo w ski, p u b lis h e d in a b ro c h u re e n title d P o lityk a

“K o ła p o słó w P o la k ó w z L itw y i R u s i”, W ilno 1907), h e p o rtra y e d th e c o o p eratio n b e tw e e n tw o

c ircles a s n e a rly h a rm o n io u s (op. cit., pp. 2 2 5 -2 2 6 ). T h e fact t h a t su c h c o lla b o ra tio n d id n o t e x is t d e sp ite s h a re d m e e tin g s a n d co m m itte es is illu s tr a te d n o t on ly b y a rch iv e m a te ria ls , b u t a lso b y th e fact (w h ich w a s c ited a n d m is in te r p r e te d b y D ą b ro w sk i w ho a rg u e d t h a t it h a d led to th e d isso lu tio n o f th e S econd D u m a ) t h a t th e circles h a d b e en u n a b le to a g re e on m e e tin g re g u la tio n s o r th e te rm s of p a r lia m e n ta r y c o o p e ra tio n d u rin g th e 100 d a y s in th e D um a.

gentry circle and other communities who perceived the National Democrats

to be the main source of political conflict in the Taken Lands and objected

against the instrum ental treatm ent offered by the Polish Circle to the Circle

of Polish Deputies from Lithuania and Ruthenia in the Second Duma. The

choice of National-Democratic constituents for the Third Duma (the elections

were scheduled for 1907, less than a month after the Kiev congress) was

completely determined by the gentry curia which was dominated by land­

owners who sympathized with the loyalists and had neutral or hostile a tti­

tudes towards the NDP. The above fact fully explains the National Demo­

crats’ restrain t in formulating opinions about the Kiev resolution29.

Could the resolutions of the congresses in Vilnius and Kiev be regarded

as an effective platform for Polish gentry’s election committees? The Vilnius

resolution did prove to be helpful, b ut only to the extent th a t it offered

general political advice for the candidates. Czesław Jankowski referred to

them as “election slogans” which “should be adopted by the candidates to

solicit the support of their voters”30. The vagueness of the Vilnius resolution

and the fact th a t the Kiev resolution merely supplemented the last p ara­

graph of the document drafted in Vilnius clearly dem onstrated th a t the

committees from nine guberniyas of Western Russia could not hope to develop

a shared political program or electoral procedures. Even if the progressing

political diversification among the Polish gentry was not a factor obstructing

the development of shared principles, the vagueness of the Vilnius resolution

was also affected by the local characteristics of Polish gentry from nine

guberniyas, the differences in their social and political views and, above all,

their attitudes towards parliam entary rule in Russia.

II. O rg a n iz a tio n a l m a tte rs

The only press coverage given to a two-day meeting in Aleksander

Chomiński’s apartm ent in Swiętojerska St. (later 21/5 Mickiewicza St.)31

included the publication of the adopted resolutions. This decision was proba­

29 H ow ever, th e ir r e s t r a i n t d id n o t b rin g th e a n tic ip a te d re s u lts . T he lo y alist g e n try w ere h o p in g t h a t by o p p osing th e N a tio n a l D em o crats, th e y w ould a tt r a c t th e su p p o rt of o th e r n a tio n a l g ro u p s in th e T ak e n L a n d s, th u s silen c in g th e a n ti-P o lis h p ro p a g a n d a of R u s s ia n n a tio n a lis ts a n d w in n in g th e a u th o r itie s ’ ap p ro v al. T h ey w e re r e lu c ta n t to su p p o rt N a tio n a l D e m o cra tic c a n d id a te s in e le ctio n s to th e T h ird D u m a. N o n e o f th e m w e re ele cte d , a n d a p a r lia m e n ta r y s e a t w e n t only to F a th e r S ta n is ła w M aciejew icz w ho w a s s u p p o rte d b y th e N a tio n a l D em o crats, b u t w a s e le cted in V iln iu s (n o t by th e g e n try ) (re fe r to: R. J u rk o w sk i,

S u k c e sy i p o ra ż k i..., pp. 3 3 5 -3 3 6 ).

30 Cz. Ja n k o w s k i, Po zjeździe, cz. II, “K u rie r L ite w sk i”, No. 281 of 12 (25) D ecem b er 1906. 31 A t th e tim e , A. C h o m iń sk i c h a ire d th e P o lish E le ctio n C o m m ittee o f th e V iln iu s G u- b e rn y ia . A ccording to h is so n ’s u n p u b lis h e d m em o irs, C h o m iń sk i w a s th e e v e n t’s in itia to r (L. C hom iński, P a m ię tn ik i, T. IV, N a tio n a l L ibrary, M a n u sc rip t D e p a rtm e n t, Akc. 9736, k . 14-15). T h e m em o irs d escrib e d iffere n ce s in th e d e le g a te s ’ p o litica l view s a n d d e liv e r a n o v e rtly h agio- g ra p h ic a cc o u n t o f A le k s a n d e r C h o m iń sk i’s role in fo rm u la tin g a n d a d o p tin g th e re so lu tio n .

bly made deliberately in order not to raise the suspicions of the authorities

who continued to scrutinize Polish gentry’s political activities and were re­

sentful of any communication between the Poles in the Taken Lands th at

escaped the formal constraints of the guberniya framework

. A meeting

agenda was probably drafted, b ut the document was lost. In J a n Olizar’s

letter to Stanisław Syroczyński of 19 Jan u ary (1 February) 1907, found in

the M anuscripts D epartm ent of the Vernadsky National Library of Ukraine

in Kiev, we read th a t meeting participants debated on the incorporation of

an institution combining all election committees from nine guberniyas in

Western Russia. Count J a n Olizar wrote to his colleague, a member of the

State Council: “Many persons are of the opinion th a t we need a perm anent

organization to coordinate our election efforts and represent us in various

political m atters, both in Petersburg and a t home. I believe th a t such an

organizations should begin their operations only after the elections, and for

practical reasons, they should be created separately by every guberniya with

a postulate regarding their [illegible word - R.J.] communication, while one

organization should represent all guberniyas, as it has been suggested in

Vilnius [...]. The m ain goal is to create such organizations everywhere. Their

form may vary, but those differences will level out with time, and an under­

standing will be reached”

. At the time, Olizar’s concept had not yet fully

m atured, and he failed to specify how those institutions were to “represent

us in Petersburg”. Nevertheless, he proposed to create more perm anent insti­

tutions th an the committees running election campaigns to the Duma and

the State Council. Olizar was probably referring to elections to the planned

lands, b ut the cited letter clearly indicates th a t members of the Vilnius-

based meeting had debated on an institution coordinating the work of elec­

32 T h e co rresp o n d e n ce e x c h a n g ed b y W łodzim ierz S uchom linow , G en era l-G o v e rn o r of Voh- ly n ia, K iev a n d P odolia, a n d P a w e ł Ig n a tiew , K iev G overnor, a f te r th e K iev co n g ress in d ic a te s t h a t th o se fe a rs w ere n o t u n fo u n d e d . A lth o u g h th e co n g ress’s o rg a n iz e rs , S ta n is ła w H o rw a tt, S ta n is ła w S y ro czy ń sk i a n d P io tr P o d g ó rsk i, h a d th e re so lu tio n officially a p p ro v ed b y th e M in is­ tr y o f I n te r n a l A ffa irs in P e te rs b u rg , Such o m lin o w h a d h is d o u b ts a b o u t a m e e tin g “t h a t w as a c o n tin u a tio n of th e congress [...] w ith o u t a p ro g ram , w ith o u t o u tsid e r p a rticip a tio n , t h a t d id n ot fit th e d e fin itio n o f a p u b lic m e e tin g ” (from S. S y ro czy ń sk i’s l e tte r to P. Ig n atiew , d a te d 4 (17) S e p te m b e r 1907 in: Центральной Державний 1сторичний ApxiB Украши у Киевр ф. 442, оп. 857, д. 430, л. 3). H e a rg u e d t h a t th e p re sen c e o f “la n d o w n e rs fro m n o n -U k ra in ia n g u b e rn iy a s ” d u rin g a m e e tin g h e ld a f te r th e fo rm al p a r t of th e co n g ress “could n o t be re g a rd e d a s a n o rd in a ry m ee tin g , a n d p u r s u a n t to th e p ro v isio n s o f §17 of th e law o f 4 (17) M a rch 1906, it falls su b je ct to th e d ecisio n s o f th e M in is try o f I n te r n a l A ffairs w h o se a p p ro v a l h a d n o t b e en o b ta in e d ”. T he o rg a n iz e rs re p o rte d th e m e e tin g o n ly to th e c iv ilia n governor. F o r m ore in fo rm a ­ tio n , re fe r to: S u k c e sy i p o ra ż k i..., pp. 4 2 9 -4 3 0 . T he g e n era l-g o v e rn o r’s re a c tio n to a closed- doors m e e tin g (re p o rte d to th e g o v ern o r) a tte n d e d b y 9 fo rm e r d e p u tie s to th e S ta te D u m a a n d 4 d e p u tie s to th e S ta te C ouncil (in a cco rd an c e w ith th e law of official ra n k s , th e l a t t e r r a n k e d h ig h e r in th e c o u rt h ie r a r c h y th a n g en era l-g o v e rn o rs) te s tifie d n o t only to g e n e ra l W. Suchom - lin o w ’s h o stility , b u t to R u s s ia n a u th o r itie s ’ o p e n re lu c ta n c e to w a rd s a n y m o v em e n ts o rg an ized b y th e P o lish g e n try o n a scale b ro a d e r t h a n th e g u b e rn iy a .

33 Нацюнальна Бiблiотека Академи Наук Украши iMeHi В. Вернадського, Рукописный Вщдш, ф. XXIV, д. 2036, Станислав Сырочынский.

tion campaigns. Unfortunately, their plans never materialized, and the hos­

tility of the authorities was not the only reason. The committees in each

guberniya were founded by the local gentry, and they were characterized by

different organizational standards and level of activity. Some guberniya com­

m ittees (the several dozen district and municipal committees would require

a book-length study) were very active and effectively organized, among them

Kaunas, Vilnius and Podolia, while others, including Kiev, Volhynia and

Minsk, had no perm anent address in late 1907

. The efforts to establish a

Central Office

were also impaired by the fact th a t several signatories of

the Vilnius program later failed to observe its provisions or complied with

them at their sole discretion. The above example of the district committee in

K aunas and the way it influenced the K aunas Guberniya Committee fully

asserts this observation.

Although the debates were not followed by any concrete action aiming to

create a central institution assisting election committees, several months

after assum ing their post in the Second Duma, the members of the gentry

noted th a t the Circle of Polish Deputies from L ithuania and R uthenia

should receive legal and adm inistrative support from a constituency office.

W hether such support should be provided by a Central Office in one of the

largest cities in the western guberniyas or a Petersburg-based office was the

second most ardently debated topic during the Kiev congress. A full meeting

agenda did not survive to our days, but information on the topics discussed

during the congress can be found in other sources. Count Ksawery Orłowski

attended the Kiev congress as a delegate of the Podolian Election Commit­

tee. The com m ittee’s agenda of 16 and 17 S eptem ber 1907 features

Orłowski’s abridged report: “The congress was chaired by Stanisław Hor-

w att, Mr. Montwiłł and Tołoczko [the correct spelling is “Tołłoczko” - R.J.]

acted as its vice chairmen, and Mr. Dymsza held the post of secretary.

During the first p art of the meeting, the participants debated on the estab­

lishm ent of a legal office and a spokesman’s office in Petersburg which would

34 T h is in fo rm a tio n c a n be fo u n d in a le tte r o f 7 (20) D ece m b er 1907 w r itte n b y B ro n isław U m ias to w sk i, vice c h a ir m a n a n d s e c re ta ry of th e P o lish V oters C o m m itte e of th e V ilnius G u b e rn iy a, in re sp o n se to M ich ał B re n s z te jn ’s, s e c re ta ry o f th e T elsiai D is tric t C o m m ittee, re q u e s t for th e a d d re s s e s o f a ll g u b e rn iy a c o m m ittees. U m ia s to w sk i w ro te: “We a re n o t in p o ssessio n o f th e e x a c t a d d re s s e s o f a ll g u b e rn iy a co m m itte es. D esp ite o u r n u m e ro u s re q u e sts , w e h a v e n o t b e e n p ro v id ed w ith th e re le v a n t d a ta . B elow y o u w ill fin d « tem porary» a d d re ss e s to w h ic h w e m a il o u r co rre sp o n d e n c e ”. I n th e lis t, R o m an S k ir m u n t’s a d d re s s in th e M in sk g u b e rn iy a sectio n fe a tu re s a q u e s tio n m a rk , a n d th e V olh y n ian , K iev a n d P o d o lian c o m m ittees a r e l i n k e d to S . H o r w a t t ’s a d d r e s s w i t h a n o t e “t h e s e t h r e e c o m m i t t e e s h a v e a sin g le c e n tra l office”, w h ic h w a s n o t tr u e a t th e tim e th e l e tte r w a s w ritte n . (Государственный Архив Российской Федерации в Москве, [ГАРФ], ф. 5122, оп. 1, д. 70, л. 41).

35 T h is is how M ich ał B re n s z te jn re fe rre d to th e p la n n e d in s titu tio n in th e r e p o rt from a m e e tin g of re p re s e n ta tiv e s o f 8 g u b e rn iy a electio n co m m ittees in V ilnius o n 8-9 J a n u a r y 1908 (L ietu v o s V alsty b es Isto rijo s A rch y v as, V ilnius, [LVIA], 6. 1135, id ’. 6, a. 16, e. 31, P rotokół

z p o sie d ze n ia p rzed sta w ic ie li ko m ite tó w w yborczych g u b e rn ia ln y ch Kijow skiego, W ołyńskiego, Mo- hylow skiego, M ińskiego, Witebskiego, G rodzieńskiego, K ow ieńskiego i W ileńskiego z 8 i 9 1 1908 r ) .

m on itor th e p r ess and resp on d to a n y n e g a tiv e publicity. T h e proposed in s t i­ tu tio n w ou ld also be a co n stitu e n c y office. T h e a n n u a l co st o f r u n n in g an office w a s e stim a te d a t 18,000 ru b les, divid ed eq u a lly in to 2 ,0 0 0 ru b les per ea c h o f th e n in e gu b ern iyas. T h e fir st dow n p a y m e n t o f 1,000 ru b les w ould be m ad e d irectly a fter th e office op en ed ”36. M ichał B ren sztejn , se cre ta ry o f th e E lectio n C o m m ittee o f th e K a u n a s G uberniya37, g a v e a m ore d eta iled accou n t o f th e K iev d eb ate in a report o f 17 S ep tem b er 1907: “M em b ers o f th e K iev co n g ress d eem ed it appropriate to crea te a p erm a n en t c o n stitu en cy office in P ete r sb u r g in ad d itio n to th e p e r m a n en t g u b ern iy a organ ization . T he co n stitu e n c y office w ou ld d evelop projects in collab oration w ith exp erts, it w ou ld co llect in fo rm a tio n an d s ta tis tic a l m a te r ia ls, perform ch a n cellery serv ices, co llect an d store d ocu m en ts b e tw e e n th e D u m a ’s su c c e ssiv e term s, tra n sfer th o se d ocu m en ts to th e n e w Circle and m a in ta in our rep r e se n ta tio n in th e D u m a. T he co st h a s b e e n ca lcu la te d in K iev a t 18,000 ru b les, in c lu d ­ in g office an d lib rary fu r n ish in g e x p e n se s, etc. E very L ith u a n ia n gu b ern iya sh a ll con trib u te 2 ,0 0 0 ru b les a n n u a lly 38, o n e -h a lf th is year, and o n e -h a lf in 19 0 8 ”39. N o n e o f th e rep orts m e n tio n th e C en tral O ffice, an d on ly M. B r e n sz ­ tejn m a k e s a referen ce to a “p erm a n en t gu b ern iya o rg a n iza tio n ” w h ich , s im i­ la rly to th e o rg a n iza tio n s q u oted in J. O lizar’s le tte r to S. S yroczyń sk i, could im p ly g en try o rg a n iza tio n s a t th e gu b ern iy a s le v e l w h ich , in ad d itio n to th e ir in v o lv e m e n t in th e e le c tio n s for th e D u m a and th e S ta te C ouncil, fostered th e d e v elo p m en t of so cia l an d c u ltu ra l life in P o lish co m m u n ities. H e m a k e s no r efer en ce to a sp o k e sm a n ’s office m e n tio n e d by co u n t K. O rłow sk i, a lth o u g h it ca n be p r esu m ed th a t th e project to op en a sp o k esm a n ’s office and a co n stitu e n c y office h ad b e e n approved by th e d e le g a te s in K au n as. The K iev co n g ress d ecided to crea te a co n stitu e n c y office in P e tersb u rg , an d its up k eep w ou ld be p aid for eq u a lly by L ith u a n ia n and R u th e n ia n g u b ern iyas in a n n u a l in s ta llm e n ts o f 2 ,0 0 0 ru b les each . T he efforts to s e t up th e office b eg a n in la te D ecem b er 19 0 7 40.

It could se e m t h a t th e h ig h co st o f m a in ta in in g a co n stitu e n c y office w ou ld discou rage th e g e n tr y from r e a c tiv a tin g th e C en tral O ffice con cep t for gu b ern iya e le c tio n c o m m itte es, b u t th is w a s n o t th e case. In th e follow in g,

36 P ro to kó ł p o sie d ze n ia P odolskiego K o m ite tu G u b ern ia ln eg o d. 16 i 1 7 W rześnia 19 0 7 r.

w W innicy, in: P olscy w ielcy w łaściciele zie m sc y n a P od o lu ..., k . 1 4 9 -1 5 3 .

37 We do n o t k n o w if h e a tte n d e d th e K iev co n g ress, a n d w h e th e r th e r e p o rt w a s a d ire c t a cc o u n t or w a s b a s e d o n se c o n d -h a n d in fo rm a tio n . H e w a s n o t lis te d in th e official re so lu tio n , b u t th is does n o t m e a n t h a t h e h a d n o t a tte n d e d th e congress. O nly th e d e le g a te s v o ted on th e re so lu tio n , a n d only th e ir n a m e s w e re p r in te d in th e te x t. T h ere fo re, it is h ig h ly p ro b a b le t h a t h e w a s a m em b e r of th e K a u n a s deleg atio n .

38 M. B re n s z te jn p ro b a b ly forgot to a d d “a n d R u th e n ia n ” in th is se n ten c e. E v e n if L ith u a ­ n ia w ere tr e a te d a s a g ro u p o f 6 n o r th - e a s te r n g u b e rn iy a s, it w ould n o t ra is e 18,000 ru b le s in in s ta llm e n ts o f 2,000 ru b le s each. A to ta l of n in e g u b e rn iy a s h a d to c o n trib u te to ra is e th e re q u ire d a m o u n t.

39 LVIA, $ . 1135, on. 6, n. 2, n. 45.

heavily publicized congress of delegates from guberniya committees (dele­

gates from Podolia did not attend) which took place in Vilnius on 8-9 January

1908, the m atter was readdressed by Józef Montwiłł, the congress’s initiator

and organizer41. “Montwiłł proposed to create a central office in Vilnius to

which all legislative drafts would be forwarded for the general use of gu-

berniya committees”42. The idea did not pick up, and it was ultim ately

abandoned when Kazimierz Zawisza, a Kaunas guberniya deputy to the

Third Duma, declared to distribute government drafts to all guberniya com­

mittees. The congress rejected Professor Józef Ziemacki’s motion to “estab­

lish a magazine defending Polish interests in Petersburg”, but adm itted th a t

“a spokesman’s division should open in the constituency office to distribute

information on the deputies’ activities and issue disclaimers in response to

false information printed in Russian and foreign press”43. The gentry in

Vilnius recognized the dire need for a special newspaper presenting the

Polish community’s views and opposing the increasingly aggressive Russian

nationalism. As always, funding was the m ain problem. The high cost of

running the constituency office had already impaired the committees’ financ­

ing capabilities, which is why the following provision was entered in the

congress report: “Should the Circle’s funds prove to be insufficient [for creating

a “spokesman’s office” - R. J.], we hereby ask the Circle of Deputies to create

an additional budget and communicate it to guberniya committees”. In prac­

tice, this implied th a t the spokesman’s office project would never take off44.

The majority of the proposed projects could not be implemented for

reasons of financial difficulty. The constituency office in Petersburg drained

the committees’ funds, and it was practically the only initiative of Vilnius

and Kiev congresses th a t had been im plemented45. The joint meetings of

three Lithuanian guberniya in Vilnius - the Podolia Organization project

developed by the Podolia guberniya committee - was open to the remaining

41 T h e co n g ress w a s c h a ire d by c o u n t J a n O lizar, h is d e p u tie s w ere E d m u n d B ortkiew icz a n d M ich ał W ęsław sk i, a n d th e s e c re ta rie s w e re T om asz Z an a n d B ro n isław U m iasto w sk i.

42 LVIA, 1135, on. 6, a. 16, n. 31, P rotokół z p o sie d ze n ia p rzed sta w icieli....

43 Ib id em . T h e sam e r e p o rt c a n be fo u n d in TAP®, $. 5122, on. 1, a. 70, n. 57. I t also in d ic a te s t h a t P ro fe sso r J . Z iem ack i r a is e d a n a d d itio n a l m o tio n to “in s tr u c t th e s p o k e sm a n ’s office in th e D e p u ty C ircle to in v e s tig a te th e n e w s p a p e r’s e s ta b lis h m e n t [... ] for p ro te c tin g P o lish n a tio n a l r ig h ts ”.

44 Ib id em .

45 A lth o u g h fu n d in g h a d b e e n a lle g ed ly scarce, th re e g u b e rn iy a c o m m itte es in R u ss ia gave 1,000 ru b le s , a sig n ific a n t a m o u n t a t th e tim e , to cover th e cost o f “w elco m in g th e d e le g a te s for th e K iev co m m itte e ”. T he r e p o rt from th e m e e tin g o f th e P o d o lian G u b e rn iy a C o m m itte e of 1 6 -1 7 S e p te m b e r 1907 re a d s: “T he cost o f w elcom ing e le ctio n c o m m ittee d e le ­ g a te s fro m 6 L ith u a n ia n g u b e rn iy a s to th e f irs t a n d th e second co n g ress a m o u n te d to 1,000 ru b le s , a n d it w ould be covered in e q u a l p a r t b y P odolia, V olhynia a n d U k ra in e ; th ere fo re , it w a s a g re e d t h a t F r.[an c isz ek ] J a ro s z y ń s k i w ould p a y to c o u n t X. O rło w sk i 333 ru b le s a n d 33 k o p e k s from th e co m m itte e ’s b u d g e t in v irtu e of P o d o lia’s c o n trib u tio n ” (P rotokół p o sie d ze n ia

P odolskiego K o m ite tu G ub ern ia ln eg o d. 16 i 17 W rześnia 1907 r w W innicy, in: P olscy w ielcy w łaściciele zie m sc y n a P o d o lu ..., k . 14 9 -1 5 3 ).

gu b ern iyas in th e U k ra in e, an d it p aved th e w a y to coop eration a t th e su p ra ­ local lev el. N e v e r th e le ss, a sin g le c en tra l in s titu tio n w a s n ev er created . The P o lish g en try w ere g ra d u a lly lo sin g th e ir in te r e s t in p o litica l an d social m a tte r s. R u s s ia n n a tio n a lis m w a s ex p a n d in g , fu e lle d b y th e O rthodox C hurch and s ta te a u th o r itie s, and it p rom p ted m a n y P o lish la n d o w n ers to ad op t th e “w a it q u ie tly for b e tte r tim e s ” str a te g y th a t h a d g u a r a n te e d th eir su r v iv a l a fter th e J a n u a r y U p risin g . T he n e w electo ra l la w o f 3 (16) J u n e 1907 cu t th e n u m b er o f P o lish g en try d e p u tie s from se v e n in th e T hird D u m a to five in th e F ou rth D u m a. T he T hird and th e F o u rth D u m a no lon ger a d d ressed th e is s u e o f “exp rop riation o f p riv a te la n d ”, th erefore th e y did n o t p ose a th r e a t to th e gentry, and th e p e a s a n ts ’ rev o lu tio n a ry in c lin a ­ tio n s, w h ich h ad r a ise d th e g e n tr y ’s fea rs d u rin g th e F ir st and th e Second D u m a , w ere e ffe ctiv ely p u t dow n b y a r ep r e ssiv e s ta te policy.

* * *

In a n a tte m p t to e v a lu a te th e p o litica l sig n ifica n c e o f th e d isc u sse d c o n g resses, it se e m s t h a t E. W yoniłłow icz’s an d H. K o rw in -M ilew sk i’s propo­ sa l to form u late e le ctio n p o stu la te s in a ra th er v a g u e an d su ccin ct m a n n er w a s a clev er ta ctic a l m an eu ver. It la id th e fo u n d a tio n s for d ev elo p in g d e­ ta ile d program s an d fo rm u la tin g th e g e n tr y ’s sta n d p o in t to w a rd s o th er p o li­ tic a l p a rties, b oth P o lish an d foreign. T he d ecisio n s p a sse d a t b oth co n g r e ss­ e s p aved th e w a y to a r e so lu tio n o f th e P o d o lia n G uberniya C o m m ittee o f 17 S ep tem b er 1907 w h ich w a s ad op ted a fter a sto rm y d eb a te over th e p olitical program o f th e P o lish D o m estic A llia n ce, a n o rg a n iza tio n crea ted in R uthe- n ia in 1907: “T he P o d o lia n g u b ern iya C om m ittee h ereb y ap p roves th e r e so lu ­ tio n s ad a p ted on 6 and 7 D ecem b er 1906 and 1 an d 2 S ep tem b er 1907 a t th e K iev co n g ress an d th e V iln iu s co n g ress o f d e le g a te s from 9 gu b ern iy a s a s its sh a red e le c tio n p latform th a t sh a ll be b in d in g for our o rg a n iza tio n d uring n e g o tia tio n s w ith o th er p o litica l groups. N o o th er program o f a n y other p o litica l a llia n c e sh a ll be b in d in g ”46. T he p ro v isio n s o f th e V iln iu s reso lu tio n also serv ed a s a v e n tu r e p o in t in d isc u ssio n s and a g r e e m e n ts d u rin g th e c rea tio n o f tem p orary ele c tio n a llia n c e s in G rodno, V iteb sk , M in sk , M oh yliv and Ż ytom ierz. T h ey w ere th e la s t p o in t o f referen ce b elo w w h ich no co n c es­ sio n s w ere m ade.

A ccord in g to W in c e n t L iso w sk i, th e o n ly P o lis h d e p u ty from th ree U k r a in ia n g u b ern iyas, th e K iev C on gress an d th e V iln iu s C on gress had co n ven ed “to cope w ith our in a b ility to cooperate. T h e fu tu re is b lea k , w e do n o t k n o w h o w th e R u th e n ia n p rob lem w ill b e re so lv e d . It co u ld p ose a sig n ific a n t difficulty, and w e sh o u ld com e up w ith a n effec tiv e str a te g y ”47. T h is h ig h ly accu rate o b serv a tio n o f th e fu tu re P o d o lia n d ep u ty p oin ted to th e dire n ee d for cooperation b e tw e e n P o lish g e n tr y grou p s in th e T ak en L ands.

46 Ib id em . 47 Ib id em , col. 85.