S.P.G.B. Lecture List For March. (1911)

Party News from the March 1911 issue of the Socialist Standard

S.P.G.B. Lecture List For December. (London District.) (1910)

Party News from the December 1910 issue of the Socialist Standard

 

 

Blogger's Note:

Once again, I don't have enough room in the label section to include all the listed speakers, so some brief information on a few of the speakers missing from the sidebar is posted below. You can also check out these older posts which covers the same ground:

• F. Dawkins was a member of the Romford Branch of the SPGB, joining in August 1905. His wiki page goes into extensive detail on his background and on his political journey from Methodism (and the ILP) to Marxism (and the SPGB). Later in life he was a parliamentary candidate for the Labour Party in the Hampstead constituency at the 1929 General Election.
• J. Kelly was a member of the Tottenham branch of the SPGB. There were two 'J. Kellys' in the Tottenham Branch of the SPGB (father and son?), both joining the Party in late August 1909.
• F. Leigh was Fred Leigh. He was a founder member of the SPGB. His membership lapsed from the Paddington Branch of the SPGB in January 1914.
• R. Fox was R. M. Fox. He joined the SPGB in Tottenham in September 1906. Better known after he left the SPGB, his 1937 autobiography, Smoky Crusade, sticks the boot into his old SPGB comrades. He should the offending excerpts from his book on the blog some time.
• G. Holmes was probably Johnny Holmes, who joined the Earlsfield Branch of the Party in August 1909, and who subsequently rejoined the SPGB (Tooting Branch) in April 1921.
• R. Kenny was Robert Kenny. Though not a founder member of the SPGB, he joined the Edmonton Branch of the Party on the 26th June 1904. That was two weeks to the day after the SPGB  was founded. His membership lapsed in late August 1914, but he rejoined Edmonton Branch in October 1916. He resigned his party membership in December 1931 on the grounds that he felt "he was too old to be active".
• J. Kemble was possibly John Kemble. He joined Earlsfield Branch of the SPGB in November 1907. There's no details of when he left - or why - but a John Kemble joined the Tooting Branch of the SPGB in January 1918, lapsing his membership in July 1923.
• H. Cooper was H.J. Cooper. He joined Earlsfield Branch of the SPGB in September 1908, and his membership was lapsed in December 1915.
• A. Jacobs was Alf Jacobs. There is more detailed background on him in this feature which appeared in the September 1954 issue of the Socialist Standard.

S.P.G.B. Lecture List For December. (London District.) (1912)

Party News from the December 1912 issue of the Socialist Standard

Blogger's Note:

Once again, I don't have enough room in the label section to include all the listed speakers, so some brief information on some of the speakers missing from the sidebar.

• C. Elliott was a member of the Tooting Branch, originally joining the SPGB in September 1909. There is no record of when they lapsed their membership.
• F. J. Rourke was a member of the Tottenham Branch, originally joining the SPGB in June 1909. Their membership was lapsed in February 1914. ("Moved away".)
• F. Stearn was a member of the Tottenham Branch. There were actually two 'F. Stearn's in the branch at the time - possibly father and son - so I don't know which one was a listed speaker for this month.
• H. Joy was a member of the Tooting Branch.
• William Lewington was a member of the Tottenham Branch, originally joining the SPGB in March 1907. He resigned from the SPGB but no date is given for his resignation.
• J.M. Wray was a member of the Wood Green Branch, originally joining the SPGB in May 1909. He resigned from the SPGB in June 1924.

A few of the names featured in the lecture list are not listed in the early membership records, This could be explained away in two ways: 1) Further confirmation that the membership records to hand are incomplete. 2) A number of SPGB members were operating under pseudonyms in their visible party activity because of the threat of blacklisting.

S.P.G.B. Lecture List For August. (1911)

 Party News from the August 1909 issue of the Socialist Standard

S.P.G.B. Lecture List For August. (1909)

 Party News from the August 1909 issue of the Socialist Standard

Blogger's Note:

As you can see, my copy of the August 1909 issue of the Socialist Standard is not exactly in tip-top condition. Interesting to see Harry Martin in amongst the speakers. 

S.P.G.B. Lecture List For July. (London District.) (1911)

 Party News from the July 1911 issue of the Socialist Standard

Blogger's Notes:

My usual moan when posting the lecture lists from the Pre-WW1 period: Not enough label space on the blog for all the speakers listed, so it becomes an SPGB Sophie's Choice at my end. (Poor taste? Just a tad.) Anyway, here's some brief info about some of the speakers who missed the cut:

• H. Joy: A member of Tooting Branch. Joined the Party in October 1907.
• C. Parker: A member of West Ham Branch. Joined the SPGB in May 1906, and was lapsed from membership in October 1929.
• F. Stearn: A member of Tottenham Branch. Lapsed during the war.
• H. Cooper: A member of Earlsfield Branch. Was a member of the SPGB from 1908 until 1915.
• F. J. Rourke: A member of Tottenham Branch. Was a member of the SPGB from 1909 until 1914.
• C. Ginger: Another member of Tottenham Branch. Charles Ginger was one of those SPGB members who joined the Party more than once. There's a suggestion that C. Ginger could also be Frank Grainger, who had originally left the SPGB to join the Herald League. (See Ken Weller's book). Frank Grainger eventually rejoined the SPGB in the 1930s, and was actually selected as the Party's parliamentary candidate for the East Ham North constituency, which the Party was planning to contest at the probable 1940 General Election. (WW2 intervened.) According to Ken Weller, after he resigned from the SPGB, later worked for the Economic League.
• J. Nightman: Here's a wee mystery. J. Nightman is listed 6 times in the July 1911 lecture list but there's no record of a 'J. Nightman' in the membership records. As I've mentioned previously on the blog, the membership records are incomplete and it's possible 'J. Nightman' is one of those missing members. Alternatively, it could have been a nom de guerre that a socialist had had to adopt whilst fighting the class war. We'll never know.

S.P.G.B. Lecture List For August. (1910)

Party News from the August 1910 issue of the Socialist Standard

The Socialist Party and Trade Unionism. (1906)

From the August 1906 issue of the Socialist Standard

[All Resolutions adopted during the course of this discussion have to be referred to the Party Membership through the Branches for ratification or otherwise. The. decision of the Party will he published after the full Report of the Debate has appeared.]

(Continued from July issue)

R. A. V. Morris moved the following resolution on behalf of the Bexley Branch :

“Whereas the S.P.G.B. in its Manifesto recognises the necessity of Trade Unions under capitalism,

And Whereas Trade Unions, as at present organised on sectional or craft lines, serve only to disunite the workers, and to give power and influence to a class of so-called labour leaders who betray and mislead the working class on both the political and economic fields.

And Whereas the only sound form of economic organisation is a union that shall (1) unite all sections of the working class on an industrial or non-sectional basis, and (2) organise them on the economic field for the complete overthrow of capitalism and the taking possession of all the instruments of production and distribution, as a necessary adjunct to the action of The Socialist Party on the political field,

Resolved that The Socialist Party of Great Britain hereby declares war on all Trade Unions as at present organised, and calls on its members to carry on an active propaganda as a preliminary to the establishment of a Socialist Union.”

Morris said that Trade Unions organised on craft lines had the dual effect of misleading and dividing the working class and giving power to so-called labour leaders. The S.P.G.B. had beea attacking the leaders on the political field, but it was from the economic organisation that they derived their power. We had to choose between the present Trade Unions and a union which would unite the workers on the basis of the class struggle. The idea that we should support the unions at times and oppose them at others was the famous S.D.F. position.

F. Leigh seconded the resolution. He said it appeared that the only party which could take any definite Trade Union action was that which advocated a revolutionary industrial organisation without affiliation to a political party. The economic condition was the basis of all working-class action. The L.R.C. was merely the reflex of the pure and simple Trade Unions which had put its men into power. The pure and simple Unions were playing into the hands of the capitalist, and were based on the perpetuation of the wages system. If the Trade Union is class-unconscious on the economic field the only logical attitude was to come out and fight them. The idea of domination by a political party was putting the cart before the horse. If you once create a revolutionary organisation on the economic field then you would have a united revolutionary political party. Political unity would follow. The economic organisation was in the forefront of the battle. We should be prepared to sacrifice a little against present unions.

Jackson said the people who had formed the I.W.W. were very fond of saying that the labour leaders were in the pay of the capitalist class. The following was the latest:

“The striking silk weavers of Kaltenback and Stevens’ shop have won the fight. Yesterday afternoon a committee had a conference with the employers, the result of which was the sanction of all the demands. The bosses granted the demands under the provisions that the weavers should try to organise all other silk mills also and bring them to the same scale of wages as Kaltenback and Stevens’ shop.”

The capitalists granted their demands on condition that they should organise the others. Would the capitalist class be prepared to support a union which was organising to fight it ? The only way was to bring into existence an organisation based on class consciousness and it was only possible to make sound class-consciousness by a sound political party.

The meeting adjourned until the following Saturday.

SATURDAY, MAY 19th.

VIENNA RESTAURANT, CLEVELAND ST.

Discussion on Bexley Resolution—Continued.

Jackson moved the following amendment:

“Delete all after “Manifesto” and substitute 

Affirms that the basis of the action of the Trade Unions must be a clear recognition of the position of the workers under capitalism and the class-struggle necessarily resulting therefrom.

This General Meeting of members of the S.P.G.B., in view of the fact that, “as the machinery of government (including the armed forces of the Nation) exists only to conserve the monopoly by the capitalist class of the wealth taken from the workers, the workers must organise consciously and politically for the conquest of the powers of government, national and local, in order that this machinery (including these forces) may be converted from an instrument of oppression into the agent of emancipation,” calls upon Trade Unionists to recognise that the class-struggle is thus in its full development necessarily a struggle for political power, and that until they have understood this they cannot act rightly.

And furthermore warns the workers of this land against those so-called Revolutionists who, advocating the Anarchist theory of the General Strike (more or less artfully disguised) neglect thus the above-cited, essentially political nature of the class-struggle, and neglecting it, ignore the truth.”

Jackson said this conception of industrialism was either the old Trade Union idea or the Anarchist idea of the General Strike. All through the history of Socialism we had had this difference cropping up. What was the difference in the old International Workingman’s Association between Marx and Bokounine ? Simply that Marx said that the fight of the workers for their emancipation was chiefly a political one whilst the Bokouninists were clamouring for the General Strike which really ended in street riots. In this country then cropped up this new Trade Union movement. The Socialist League and members of the S.D.F. in their time formed what was practically an I.W.W., and laid it down that the struggle of the workers was to be fought on the economic field. And the Socialist League became Anarchist,. In France practically the same thing was going on. He had with him the Manifesto of the General Confederation of Labour. In it was said :

“The French Trades Unions unite the workers on an essentially economic basis, and endeavour to carry out as much as possible the following points: (1) They occupy themselves with ameliorating constantly the existing conditions of the workers by reduction in hours, increase of salary, the sanitary condition of factories and workshops, the moral independence of the workers, etc. They do not forget that the reforms obtained from the employers cannot be a final aim, but only a step towards more radical amelioration. Also in order to be effective all reforms must be accompanied by a curtailment of capitalist privileges. (2) They do not limit their activity to partial and immediate reforms ; convinced that only in the abolition of the wage system is the definite remedy of exploitation and human misery. They prepared the way for the capitalist expropriation, which making the Trades Unions and Trades Councils the centres of the new social life, will give to all the opportunity for integral development.”

That was precisely the argument in favour of Industrial Unionism—that the Trades Unions formed the basis of the future Society. As regards the General Strike they said :

“The General Strike reveals itself under two aspects which complete themselves mutually and both have in a high degree a revolutionary character. The General Strike can have as its aim the immediate conquest of partial ameliorations ; or it may be the equivalent of the proletarian revolution and imply the taking in possession of the whole social organism by the working class.”

And again

“Trades Unions will take as their mission the inauguration of communist property on the ruins of individual property.

“They will take possession of factories and workshops, and the Trades Unions in each industry, putting themselves in connection with their Federation, will regulate the amount of production.”

That was precisely the position of the I.W.W.

The essential aim of the revolutionary working-class party was the capture of the political machinery.

Anderson seconded the amendment. Certain political opponents of ours were ready to sidetrack our Party by this economic fake, and certain members of the S.P.G.B. were trying to do the same thing. Until all the members of the organisation were Socialist you would not have a sound economic organisation at all.

Leigh said he wished to oppose the amendment. He had had conversation with members of the S.L.P., and they had told him that they were ready to send out the men in their party who were keeping the two organisations apart. Jackson’s amendment was purely a declaration against Anarchism, where the political organisation of the working class was condemned. To admit the necessity of an economic organisation of the working class and then to tie them down to a political party was to make the success of the economic organisation impossible. The theory of the economic organisation alone was the Anarchist theory purely and simply, but the resolution advocated a sound economic organisation to work in conjunction with a political party. It was untrue to say that he was being used by another party to break up this party. He had pointed out to Jackson that he was in favour of political action, yet Jackson was accusing him of advocating Anarchy.

Neumann said when we found our men had backed up the S.L.P. position as far as Industrial Unionism was concerned, he thought he was justified in saying that their action had been detrimental to the Party. It behoved members of the Party to set a firm face against this. It had been said by a speaker that some of the people of this hostile organisation were prepared to dispense with their leaders. Well, we had not yet seen much evidence of it. If they would have nothing to do with us politically we could have nothing to do with them economically. If, by any miracle, their new economic organisation should be compelled to take political action, it would be reform action due to the men who formed its membership. If the S.L.P. was as good a political party as the S.P.G.B.; if it had in the eyes of certain members a better industrial organisation, why did they remain in the S.P.G.B.?

[To be Continued.]

The Socialist Party and Trade Unionism. (1906)

From the July 1906 issue of the Socialist Standard

The first day’s Session of the Party meeting on Trade Unionism was held on Saturday, May 12, at 6 p.m. at the Communist Club, Charlotte Street, Fitzroy Square.

Comrade A. J. M. Gray, was elected to the Chair.

It was decided to discuss resolutions to be placed before the meeting in the order in which they appeared on the printed paper supplied to the members.

J. Kent accordingly moved the following resolution :—

“Whereas The Socialist Commonwealth will be established by the conscious act of the revolutionary working class wresting from the master class the ownership and control of the means of wealth production, for which conscious act the working class must prepare by organising industrially and politically, and, whereas existing working-class industrial organisations, being based upon the superstition of the brotherhood of capital and labor, and representing only sectional interests, are stumbling blocks in the revolutionary path, the S.P.G.B. while re-affirming that ‘The first duty of the Socialist Party is the teaching of its principles and the organisation of a political party on a Socialist basis,’

“(1.) Declares war on existing Trade Unions and their leaders.

“(2.) Urges its members, while not neglecting their ‘first duty,’ to advocate the formation of an industrial organisation based upon the irreconcilable antagonism between the capitalist class and the working class, and having as its object the taking over and administering of the means of wealth production ; such industrial organisation to be affiliated to or working in complete unison with The Socialist Party, thus ensuring that the class struggle shall be waged as effectively as possible on both the industrial and political fields.”

In moving his resolution, J. Kent said that if the trade unions were stumbling blocks in the revolutionary path, those stumbling blocks had to be removed. He thought that recognising the necessity for political action, the Party should affirm its decision to organise a political party on a Socialist basis. The Party, however, had never laid it down that we should carry on war on the existing trade unions, but had merely opposed the trade union leaders through its press and through its propaganda. The economic organisation should either be affiliated to the political party, or should work in unison with it, or otherwise, it would be as well to abandon political action and simply carry on an economic fight. It would be absolutely necessary for the action of the one on the political field to be supported by the action of the other on the economic field, and the action of the one on the economic field to be supported by the action of the other on the political.

Phillips seconded the resolution.

A. Anderson moved to amend the resolution by inserting “Socialist” before “industrial organisation” in lines 3 and 7 of clause (2), which was accepted by the mover and seconder, and to substitute “and controlled by” for “working in complete unison with” in lines 8 and 9.

Anderson said he agreed with Kautsky that the political organisation must dominate the economic. The political must control the economic or the contrary would occur. He did not want to see repeated the farce of the S.L.P. in America and the S.T. and L.A.. or the tragedy of the S.L.P. in England and the I.W.W. Dix seconded the amendment. Barker asked whether it would be possible for men and women to join the political organisation and not belong to the economic and vice-versa.

Anderson replied that in joining the S.P.G.B. members of the working class would join it in both its political and economic aspects. They would pay subscriptions to THE organisation—that organisation comprising both wings.

F. S. Leigh asked whether, in the event of a union being formed, a workman refusing to join the political party would be compelled to become a blackleg.

Anderson : If he did not adhere to the principles of the party he would not be fit to join it. T. A. Jackson said he had always understood that we had to capture political power and then to proceed to the administration of the means and instruments of production. The difficult point was that while present Society existed the wage-workers would be compelled to join permanent or temporary trade unions. Trade unions were a necessity under capitalism.

With regard to the leaders of the trade unions, a trade union leader was what the rank and file allowed him to be. A trade union was the arm which the worker instinctively raised to protect himself. As Marx said in his “Value, Price and Profit,” “if the workers did not struggle to maintain the price of their commodity they would rapidly become degenerated into slaves incapable of revolt.” If the resolution was carried the only logical course open to the Party would be to withdraw all its members from the existing trade unions. What it was necessary to wage war on was the economic ignorance which rendered these trade unions ineffective.

It was our purpose to wage war upon their faults and the source of their faults—their economic ignorance. It was necessary that the political party should dominate the economic. When the workers had been educated by the political party they themselves would see to it that their trade unions were no longer ineffective. 

Neumann said he was opposed to Kent’s resolution. When war was declared on the unions war would be declared on the leaders. But he did not agree that the declaration of war on existing trade unions was an anti-trade union declaration. There was no reason that these existing trade unions should not be Socialist trade unions. If war was declared on the unions, however, it would be impossible for the members of the S.P.G.B. to remain inside the existing trade unions. This attitude was impracticable at the present time, because it was a question of their daily bread that members of the Party should be members of the trade unions. He would not support the resolution because it was unsound.

Cole asked had Jackson ever been in a strike or conducted one. The trade unions were not organised to fight the capitalist class, but to protect the capitalist system and support it. He supported Kent’s resolution.

Fitzgerald said that the S.P.G.B. was the first party which had at its inception held meetings on the trade union question. If we declared war on the existing trade unions we should be waging war upon them in every shape and form. Certain members of the Party had to remain in trade unions. The question was how could war be best waged on the wrong basis on which the trade unions were organised. If men were engaged in a works at 30/- a week, and 5/- per week reduction was threatened, they would naturally come out to resist that reduction, then what would be our position ? At present we could do no more than propagate the right idea inside and outside the trade unions in favour of the proper method of organisation. He was opposed to the resolution.

Fairbrother said that if men were on strike our position was to support them, yet all the time to point out how they were wrongly organised. The unions should be based on the class struggle. The economic organisation was more important than the political. The political was but the reflex of the economic. The L.R.C., for instance, had got their position on the back of the existing trade unions, not by any fight on the political field. If the workers were organised on the class struggle on the economic field he could not conceive their action on the political field being anything but that of Socialists. The majority of the working class were outside the trade unions, and the trade unions could not permanently improve their conditions as long as the condition of the unorganised mass outside was not improved.

A. W. Pearson asked whether Fairbrother wanted the Party members to be allowed to join an economic organisation not affiliated to the Party. If members and non-members of our Party were to be admitted to an economic organisation they too would soon find themselves in the House of Commons as political mountebanks. The union advocated by Fairbrother would allow members of other parties to come into it and so dominate it on the political field. If the Party was to form an industrial union it must be formed to act in unison with the Party. Barker wanted to know what was to be done with members of the Party inside the existing trade unions in view of the proposed war on the unions. He was opposed to the position laid down by the resolution.

T. W. Allen said he proposed a revolutionary economic organisation which would soon know how to deal with those who wanted to “wangle” who came into that organisation. The organisation should not be affiliated to the political party until the class consciousness of the workers would bring about unity on the political field. That the working class were ignorant was the effect of certain causes. The labour leaders wilfully betrayed the interests of the workers to the capitalist class. The present trade unions were based upon the idea of the finality of the capitalist system. Under the present unions one section of the workers went into the fight with the capitalist class whilst another section black-legged upon them. When a sturdy, sound, economic, revolutionary organisation had been formed, then the political would come as the reflex of the economic.

A. Anderson replied that the trade unions were shams and frauds and delusions. Just as long as you had a separate organisation from the political party the movement would be sidetracked whether it was called the I.W.W. or any other combination of initials. Since the trade unions were stumbling blocks in the revolutionary path, they must be fought. It did not follow that if it was decided to oppose the unions that the members of the S.P.G.B. should be immediately called out of the existing trade unions. As the political party controlled the members of the political party so also would they control the members of the economic organisation.

J. Kent replied that the resolution urged that the members should advocate an economic organisation, not immediately proceed to organise it. The time had arrived when we should go beyond the words of the manifesto, and advocate the formation of a Socialist industrial organisation. The trades unions, as Marx said, failed because of the guerrilla warfare they were carrying on. Had we not said in the columns of the Party paper that the proper organisation of the working class was their organisation as a class. Further, no organisation would be effective that was not affiliated with or working in complete unison with the political party. If you were going to form an organisation apart from the political party, then in that way lay danger.

The amendment was carried by 30 votes to 20.

The amendment having thus become a substantive resolution, the vote was taken and the resolution was carried by 30 votes to 26.

(To be continued.)

Battersea Social. (1906)

Party News from the January 1906 issue of the Socialist Standard

In this, the alleged festive season, it is pleasant to find that some people enjoy themselves. Truly, on Dec. 10th, with a fog so thick without that it might have been a blind man’s holiday, it was surprising to find Sydney Hall. Battersea, teaming with such a joyous gathering.

The occasion was a tea and social arranged between the West and South West London branches of the S.P.G.B. The Battersea, Paddington, Tooting, Fulham and Peckham branches were well represented. Clerkenwell was also represented, and contributed materially (or should it be immaterially?) to the amusement of the evening.

But I am anticipating.

After the tea had been hidden from view, Comrade Leigh of Paddington was prevailed upon to take the chair, and an excellent and varied programme was gone through. It would be invidious to praise particularly, because where all were excellent none could be more, and, (let me confess it) I have forgotten many of their names.

Suffice to say, the Social was a great success, and all were of opinion that this, the first joint Social, should not be the last; for such a pleasant relaxation from the stern uphill fight against Capitalism, cannot fail to bear fruit in better knowledge of each other, in closer comradeship and increased enthusiasm for the cause we have at heart.

The fun still ran high, when the stalwarts from the outlying branches carved their way through a dense London particular to the railway station in time for the last train home, to snatch a few hours sleep before commencing another week of drudgery, brightened, however, by memories of that evening, and by hope for the time when all shall be better than well.

Bolus o’ the Ditch.

SPGB Meetings. (1906)

Party News from the January 1906 issue of the Socialist Standard

SPGB Outdoor Meetings. (1905)

Party News from the June 1905 issue of the Socialist Standard

S.P.G.B. Lecture List For May. (1905)

Party News from the May 1905 issue of the Socialist Standard

SPGB Meetings and Notices. (1905)

Party News from the February 1905 issue of the Socialist Standard

Party Notes. (1905)

Party Notes from the January 1905 issue of the Socialist Standard

During the month of January there will be two meetings of the Executive Committee, viz., Saturday 7th at 3 p.m., and Tuesday 17th at 7 p.m.

* * *

Since the election of the present Executive Committee, there have been three vacancies created by the resignation of Comrades E. Allen, H. Hawkins, and Woodhouse. The latter is now in the United States in pursuit of a livelihood and has, I am sure, the beat wishes of every member of the Party. The following members have been elected to the Executive to fill the vacancies: T. A. Jackson, A. Barker and F. S. Leigh.

* * *

A Branch has been formed in Tottenham. The Secretary is Leslie Boyne, 17, Etherley Road, South Tottenham, N., who will be glad to hear of anyone desirous of joining.

* * *

The Quarterly Delegate Meeting to receive and deal with the report of the Executive Committee will be held at the Communist Club at 6.30 p.m. on Saturday, 21st January. Each Branch is entitled to send two delegates. Credential forms have been sent to the Branches, and Branch Secretaries should see that each Credential issued is properly filled up.

* * *

In order that the Quarterly Report of the Executive Committee may be completed, will Branch Secretaries please note that the Reports of Branches (form C) should be forwarded so as to reach the.Central Office by Saturday, 7th inst. if possible.

* * *

Membership Cards for 1905 are now ready. Each Branch Secretary should send at once to : Comrade J. McNicol, Assistant Secretary, 179, Isledon Road, Finsbury Park, London, N., a list containing the registered numbers of those members for whom new cards are required. The member’s full name and address may be given in each case, but the registered number is all that is necessary.

* * *

All remittances from Branches to the Party Funds should be sent to Comrade McNicol, who transacts the Secretarial work as far as Party Finances are concerned. All remittances ia connection with payment for copies of the Socialist Standard, advertisements therein, etc., should be sent to Comrade Anderson, 24, Belmont Avenue, Edmonton, N.

* * *

Articles, Branch Reports, and all other matter intended for insertion in the columns of the Socialist Standard should be forwarded to 5, Arvon Road, Highbury, N. If members and other readers would follow out these instructions considerable trouble and delay will be obviated.

* * *

Ill health has compelled our Comrade Dowdeswell to cease his work in connection with the Lecture List. For the present the duties have been taken up by Comrade T. A. Jackson, 408, St. Anne’s Road, Harringay, N. It is to be hoped that with the advent of more genial weather, Comrade Dowdeswell will again be in form and at his old post.

* * *

Members should use their best endeavours to secure.subscribers to the Socialist Standard. Subscription forms can be had on application to Comrade Anderson. A subscription form enclosed in each letter to friends likely to be interested would bring good results.

The S.P.G.B. Lecture List June (1907)

Party News from the June 1907 issue of the Socialist Standard

S.P.G.B. Lecture List For May (1910)

Party News from the May 1910 issue of the Socialist Standard

Paddington Branch Report. (1906)

Party News from the April 1906 issue of the Socialist Standard

Throughout the Winter we have been very busy waging the fight, and have missed only two Sunday meetings and those through rain. Speaking to good-sized audiences and arousing keen interest in the principles of our Party have resulted in considerable discussion and good sales of literature, whilst constant reiteration of Socialism is every day turning the apathetic into the sympathetic, and the sympathetic into out-and-out followers. Just now we are being heckled by one or two of the very old school of Trade Unionism, who, having had the same questions answered by various speakers, still persist in asking them, so proving both their doggedness and the thickness of their skulls. Another phase of our activity is that every Sunday night a number of our comrades have made raids upon some of the strongholds of confusion, carrying death and destruction (figuratively speaking) into their midst, so that the name of the S.P.G.B. is dreaded by the misleaders of the working class.

Finally, and perhaps most important of all, the debate between our comrade Fitzgerald and a local councillor and Tory politician has been carried through with great success before a large audience, and our future task is to transform this triumph into a boom for the S.P.G.B.

F. S. Leigh

From the Fighting Line. (1907)

From the January 1907 issue of the Socialist Standard

Branches should see that reports of work, incidents of the local fight, and all matters of Party interest and propaganda value for publishing under this heading, are regularly communicated.

Battersea—“All work and no play.” etc. After the heat and burden of the municipal fight, Battersea took a siesta in the form of a concert and dance at historic Sydney Hall, on the 9th ult. (Incidentally, Battersea also took a collection in aid of the Party Organ Fund, which was thoughtful and helpful.) For the occasion Paddington sent over a troupe of mummers who produced an impressive little dramatic sketch, "Wasted Lives,” which had been specially written by Comrade Fred Leigh. Setting the scene in Moscow during the time of the bloody street fighting between Russian workmen in revolt and the brutal forces of autocracy, Leigh skillfully presented the spectacle of a Fabianesque English doctor being driven by the irresistible logic of events from the position of a dilletante anti-revolutionary, into the necessity for taking sides for or against the struggling factory workers with whom lie finds himself. He chooses the side of the people and in the final tableau falls with the tiny remnant of a barricade defence who, forced to retreat into the house, make a last stand, and are shot dead by the victorious Cossacks.

Having regard to the narrow limitations of stage space and the almost entire absence of stage properties, Messrs. Leigh, Allen, Charles, Hopley and Jackson, (not to mention Stage-Manager Lewis) are to congratulated upon a very meritorious performance.

The musical contributions of Comrades Beale, Stuart, Greenham, Lewis, Passit, Shipper, and others were hugely appreciated, while Comrade Gray took the chair (and the collection) in his own ahem! inimitable manner.

Tottenham has not the vantage ground that Islington Branch possess in Finsbury Park, but Tottenham are by no means depressed. By dint of sheer hard propaganda work they have during the past season almost doubled their membership, and against the combined efforts of local pseudo-labour parties to squelch them, have not only held their own finely, but carried the fight into their opponents' quarters, to the profound discomfiture of the latter every time. Tottenham are now one of the strongest branches in the Party, and have been able to make a weekly donation to the Central Office of 10/- for some months past.

Watford. From the home of one of the largest brunches to the home of one of the smallest. Watford at present is the most distant outpost of the Party (although rumour hath it that even this distinction may shortly he lost); its membership is small and the local conditions are exceedingly difficult for straight Socialist propaganda. The town has probably a larger collection of the one-step-at-a-time-and-the-smaller-the-better parties than any other town of the same size can show, and the unhappy effects of their confusionist work is very marked. A branch of the Party several hundred strong could find plenty of work to engage its constant attention. Yet a very few determined members even under these conditions can make their presence felt, and the little Watford Branch can claim to have done that during the past year. Its manifesto on the local elections back in the Spring made an effective case against the candidates claiming to represent the specific interests of the working class with the result that all of them were defeated by large majorities. Sunday open air meetings of a fairly good character have been held throughout the fine weather, and although the seed sown may take longer to germinate under the adverse local conditions, there is no doubt at all but that the work put in will presently bear good fruit. Steady does it at Watford. Better a few members acting as one than a few hundred acting at sixes and sevens.

Tooting. The Tooting Branch has been very much alive of late, although no reports of their doings has appeared for some time.

The Branch decided to contest the local ward at the recent Borough Council Election, hoping that by participating in a such a contest in opposition to all and sundry, they would clear away some of the cobwebs from the minds of those who, taking their Socialism from the capitalist Press, labour under the delusion that Socialism is simply Liberalism and Labourism in an advanced form.

The contest also answered those critics who contend that our principles only afford scope for a negative attitude. We entered the field of positive political action with Comrades Barker. Dumenil, and McManus, and when the wire-pulling in the capitalist camp had run its course we found we had for opponents 3 Municipal Reformers, 4 alleged Independents (really 2 Liberals and 2 Tories running jointly) and 3 “Labour” candidates. We placed our position before the public against the position of all the others without fear or favour, repeatedly challenging anyone to come upon our platform and show any real difference between the other ten. No one attempted the impossible.

We got an advertisement from an unexpected quarter which is interesting as showing the tactics of the confusionists. Speaking for the S.D.F. in Tooting Broadway, on, the Sunday before the election, T. Glossop, in the course of his address, without any question being asked, advised the working men of Tooting to vote, not for the “Labour" candidates, but for the three run by the S.P.G.B., who were the only Socialist candidates in the field. Posters were up all over the district at that moment announcing that Mrs. Despard. F. Knee and W. H. Humphreys, all S.D.F.’ers, would speak in support of the Labour candidates at Tooting Graveney School on the Monday. We have since heard that Glossop tried hard to induce F. Knee and Humphreys not to address that meeting but without success, for they all kept the engagement. When the public of Tooting want to know why we are opposed to the S.D.F. they can for the future have some local matter as well as national. The gulf between the S.P.G B. and the "Labour" Party (any section) should be now apparent to all interested. The Branch got an election address into practically every house and flat in the ward irrespective of the resident being a voter or not. The Labour Party, who are so desirous of educating the workers, ignored the voteless. which is an advantage as the voteless have less to unlearn. We did no canvassing whatsoever, but held plenty of open-air meetings at which we had a little Radical opposition, which was easily dealt with and a fair number of questions. The public generally showed much more interest in our election meetings, than in our ordinary propaganda ones. It may interest some also to know that a considerable influx of new members is one result of the campaign. Tooting is getting a move on to some tune, as, in addition to increased membership, the speaking capabilities of the members have improved considerably as a result of the increased practice that they have had. The total cost of the election to us was £3 3s 6d and the votes recorded for our candidates were Barker. 94. McManus. 77. Dumenil. 59. Of these 50 were plumpers.

(Notes from West Ham. Romford, and Paddington held over.)