74
tude towards Longuet, branding him as a reformist, also as an agent of capitalism, and demanding his expulsion. Frossard tried to explain away this telegram of the Executive regarding Longuet. He said: Well, those Russians are somewhat hasty in using words; it must not be taken so seriously. The telegram was written in a rather sharp language; but Longuet left the party not on account of it. I do not know whether this telegram actually did play a decisive part or not, but it certainly was a contributing factor. Frossard was wrong, of course, in persisting in the attempt to retain Longuet within the Party. After the decisions at Tours, the question arose as to what should be our attitude to the French Party. We were quite aware that the Party was not yet a Communist party, not quite a Communist party.
There have remained in the Party individual elements which are even now either Centrist or semi-Centrist, who assert these traditions everywhere in party, press and parliament. Yet we still remained of the opinion that we must treat this party differently from the Italian, which had already been affiliated to the Communist International for two years. We had a sort of tacit understanding with the French comrades of the Communist group in the French Party to allow a few months for the purpose of re-grouping and organising work. We did not bring the least pressure to bear upon the Party.
Loriot quoted an article yesterday wherein I am supposed to have said that the French Party had in general acted rightly. This I confirm. It refers to a telegram sent by the Executive to the French Party at its last administrative congress. In this telegram the Executive declares that we still greet the Party and will discuss at the Congress with representatives of the Party, where the question of the changes in the policy of the French Party is concerned.
We must be clear in our judgment of the Party, and we must talk over its organisation. This we
