"The butter quantum prescribed by the People's Commissar of the Foodstuffs Commissariat for the year of 1920 for all rayons of European Russia, which have no dairies, amounts on an average to three Ibs. of melting-butter for each cow. The total of butter delivered and placed at the disposition of the public organs shall be paid for at the receiving points at fixed prices.
Article 9 says: "Careless or slow delivery of the prescribed duties will cause the state to take recourse to the strictest measures against persons guilty of such neglect, such as loss of right to their share of goods, exacting of a double quantum of butter, requisition of their cows, in order to turn them over to persons who have punctually complied with their duties, arrest of the guilty and his turning over to the local courts."
A good deal has been said about the bad relationship between the soviet government and the peasants as a result of the requisition policy of the government. I have also heard much, very much, of it in Moscow. Not from the counter-revolutionists, but partly from the left social-revolutionaries, maximalists, and anarchists, and partly also from the communists themselves.
But I shall say nothing about it, except what I myself have learnt from direct sources. The other information, perhaps, can be proven by others, but not by myself. For the cases that I state, I have no other proof than that I can refer to the fact that the peasants themselves have told it to me.
For the cities and the armies the state needs grain more than anything else. The peasants need industrial products, textile goods, manufactured articles and hardware, etc. But the state cannot supply them with these, because it has nothing or next to nothing for the great needs. But it cannot allow the soldiers to go hungry on that account. Hence it is compelled to demand the grain from the peasants. It pays them a maximum price for it. This maximum price of the government is in proportion to the government's maximum price for industrial products. If the peasant could obtain the needed industrial products from the government he would, no doubt, give his grain to the state without delay. But such is not the case. The peasant must buy the industrial products in open smuggle trade in the open market at usury prices. From the government he receives 100 rubles for one pud of flour. But for a roll of yarn he has to pay 3,000 to 5,000 rubles and for a pound of soap from 800 to 1,200 rubles. In order to buy what he necessarily must have, he is compelled to also sell his grain or his flour at usury prices in the market. Then he receives 20,000 rubles for a pud of flour. That enables him to cover his most pressing needs.
The peasant is, consequently, not inclined to turn over his grain to the state. The reason for this we have just seen. They are obvious. But as the state must have the flow for its existence, it sends soldiers into the villages who requisition the grain from the peasants, waiving the question of right or wrong. The peasants hide their grain. If it is found, then one may often say: "May God have mercy on them." We have previously quoted a decree of Lenin's, which deals with punishment of the peasants. Not infrequently it happens that the requisitioning soldiers take more rights than the decrees give them. It is also easy to understand that it is not the most honorable proletarians which form the requisition companies, but it is mostly the worst elements, which have been brutalized by the war. Finally, the peasants themselves are no aestheticizing philosophers or pacifists, but naturally coarse, and as a consequence it frequently comes to a collision, in which the peasants generally come out second best, as they are either unarmed or poorly armed.