There was no more popular name in Revolutionary Russia in the year 1919, than that of Alexander F. Kerensky. Ten years ago he was not only the "Supreme Ruler", but, at the same time, he personified the ideals and wishes of the Russian people. One vividly recollects now all the events of the Russian revolution; we are also reminded of the Prime Minister Kerensky, whose name was so closely linked with all those revolutionary Events.

I first saw Kerensky, the Minister, in Petrograd, in the year 1917. If at that time anybody had told me, that ten years later I should meet him as an exile in foreign lands, I would probably never have agreed with that prediction. Nevertheless, ten years after the Great Russian Revolution I met the exiled Kerensky, and in those moments I saw before me not the Minister-Kerensky, but an exile. And so with this political immigrant, and not with the Minister, who had greatly changed and aged in appearance after those horrifying years, I had lately a short interview.

I had many serious and painful questions to ask him. I wanted to discuss 2these questions with Kerensky and, therefore, I went to the Drake Hotel. Kerensky's Secretary warned me by telephone that Kerensky was very busy; nevertheless, he would grant me ten minutes for an interview. I, of course, was satisfied with those few minutes and went to his suite.

The interview lasted quite some time. These ten minutes seemed to me to be somehow much longer. When our friendly and unofficial interview had come to an end, then only I had noticed, looking at my watch, that it had lasted 35 minutes.

The first subject discussed by us was that of the newspaper Rassviet. Mr. Kerensky was exceedingly pleased with the activity of the Russian Labor Organization, thanks to the efforts of which this daily paper was created. The great merit of this paper lies exclusively in the fact, that it carries on a valiant fight against all kinds of despotism. This paper carries on its fight simultaneously against despotism, regardless of Monarchist or Bolshevist tendencies. Hence, this paper is of great value to the Russian colony. This paper has, undoubtedly, its weak points; but those defects 3appear mostly in its literary section. Kerensky dislikes, among other things, the many articles of our most respected Ivan Kuzmich. He frowned especially, when I mentioned Okuntsov's articles, under the headline "Criticism." He considers them not serious enough, and many of them, in his opinion, are rather "wretched lampoons" than real criticism.

I explained to him, that the columns of our paper are open to everyone, and that for articles published in it, the responsibility falls exclusively upon their authors. Kerensky was satisfied with my statement. I, then, began to ask him the questions I had jotted down....