Answers to Correspondents. (1906)

From the December 1906 issue of the Socialist Standard

R. B. (Goodmayes.) — The matter stands thus—A number of members of the Islington Branch were found guilty by a party vote, of action detrimental to the interests of the organisation and injurious to the cause of Socialism, and they were expelled therefore. They now refuse, we understand, to accept the Party’s decision, and still pose as.members of the Islington Branch. This is ludicrous enough, but when at the same time that they are asserting their membership, they proclaim to the world that the Party is rotten and corrupt, the matter becomes sheer farce. We regret exceedingly that our late comrades should place themselves in so deplorably ridiculous a position, but that is their business, not ours. Our business is to warn everybody concerned against the false pretence they make of membership of the S.P.G.B.

G. Geis (Peckham.) —Thanks. But we cannot make ourselves responsible for all the irrelevant and unimportant communications we receive, and we will not undertake to return them to their blushing authors unless stamped addressed envelopes are enclosed for the purpose.

FlL. POP. (Herts.)—We have seen the article in the Weekly People, and recognise the fine Roman hand. The statement that our “Handicraft to Capitalism” pamphlet is the “first and only” is, of course, untrue. But it is true that our translation of Kautsky’s work is a translation only. We prefer our Kautsky pure and undefiled. In this connection we may observe that the interpolation of one’s own ideas into a translation of another man’s work without permission is not regarded as decent, while to foist the result upon an unsuspecting public, without making quite clear where the author leaves off and the translator commences, is just fraudulent. The statement that our largest branch has gone on strike, and that we are in a “bad mix,” is fathered by the wish. There’s nothing seriously mixed with the S.P.G.B., and our largest branch has not gone on strike. A number of members of one of our largest branches gave indication of being in a “bad mix” and the Party dealt with them promptly. The rest of the article requires no comment from us.

W. McT. (Edinburgh.)—You must learn to make some little allowance when perusing comic journals of the type of that you mention. As a matter of fact there is no Ilford Branch of the I.L.P. in existence. The statement, like so much of the light reading of our esteemed contemporary, was founded on fiction.