International Socialist Bureau. (1906)

From the November 1906 issue of the Socialist Standard

I. S. B.

Brussels, October, 1906.

Dear Comrade,—

The plenary assembly of the International Socialist Bureau will take place on Saturday, November 10th, at the Secretary’s Office of the I.S.B. (Brussels, People’s Palace, 17, Joseph Steven’s-street, 1st story, room 6), at 10 o’clock in the forenoon.)

Agenda:

1. The organisation and agenda of the International Socialist Congress of Stuttgart (August, 1907).

2. Second examination of Van Kol’s proposition concerning the International Congresses and the I.S.B.

3. The rules of the Parliamentary Socialist and Labour Commission.

The Executive Committee:

Anseele, Vandervelde, Huysmans.

The Essentials of Socialist Unity. (1906)

From the January 1906 issue of the Socialist Standard

To the Socialist Working Class

Comrades,

In the January number of our official organ—the Socialist Standard—we addressed you concerning the International Socialist Congresses, and briefly dwelt with our reasons for declining an invitation from the Secretary of the British section at the Amsterdam Congress to take part in forming a National Committee to deal with matters arising out of the International Congress, on the grounds that it should be the task of the Socialist Party alone to deal with these questions, and that, judging by the composition of the British section at the Amsterdam Congress, the proposed Committee would consist of men who are in no sense of the word Socialists. That Committee has now been formed and its composition fully justifies the view we took of it in January last.

In accordance with our promise, we have forwarded a communication to the International Socialist Bureau, asking that, in our name, a motion be placed upon the Agenda of the next International Congress, for discussion in open Congress, embodying the following proposals:—

(a) That admission to future International Socialist Congresses shall be open only to all avowed Socialist, bodies that accept the essential principles of Socialism, i.e., socialisation of the means of production and distribution, union and international action of workers, Socialist conquest of the Public Powers by the proletariat organised as a class party recognising and proclaiming the class war, running all candidates upon this basis and adopting an attitude of hostility under all circumstances to all sections of the capitalist party.

(b) That all previous resolutions (defining the basis of admission to. the Congress) be rescinded.

(c) That all matters upon the agenda be discussed in open Congress and that the methods of discussion in Commissions be entirely abolished.

(d) That each delegate shall have one vote, but if a poll be demanded, each Party represented shall be entitled to one vote.

(e) That representation upon the Bureau shall be upon the basis of Parties represented at the Congress, each of which shall be entitled to one representative upon the Bureau.

We have further requested the Bureau to at once consider the advisability of adopting one language in which all the business of the Bureau and of the Congress shall be conducted, with the object of coming to a decision upon the matter in sufficient time for the language decided upon to be adopted as the official language of the Stuttgart Congress.

Up to now the International Socialist Congresses have not considered the composition of the Nationalities represented thereat. At Amsterdam, National matters were entered into, when a resolution was passed in favour of National Unity. If the International Movement is to be placed upon a sound revolutionary basis the Congress must enter into the character of the different National organisations which are obtaining admission to the Congresses and affiliation to the Bureau. When the Congress has, by its resolute action, eliminated all pseudo-socialist organisations, such as deny the existence of the class war, or in any way support the capitalist class or its catspaws in their respective countries, then unity of the Socialist forces in each country will be easily accomplished.

We are, Comrades,

With fraternal greetings,

The Executive Committee,

Socialist Party of Great Britain.

Head Office,

1a, Caledonian Road, London,

December 1905.

American Parties and the Unity Question. (1908)

From the May 1908 issue of the Socialist Standard

For the information of readers whose knowledge of the "Socialist movement" is limited, a few explanations may be helpful before dealing with the subject under discussion.

The Weekly People is the organ of the Socialist Labour Party of America—an organisation claiming to be "a bona fide strictly revolutionary party of Socialism." Until its unfortunate "endorsement" of the "Industrial Workers of the World," such a claim could be well sustained.

The latter organisation (I.W.W.) declares as its object "the propagation of the principles of Industrial Unionism with a view to the establishment of an organisation based on the 'class struggle' and aiming at the overthrow of the Capitalist system and the establishment of a Socialist Republic."

The "Socialist Party" of America is a curiously motley conglomeration of "Socialists" of all shades and hues. Like the Social Democratic Party and the Independent Labour Party of Great Britain, it is dominated by "leaders," whose main concern is to gain seats—anyhow, on any kind of vote—in the Parliamentary body which they affect to believe will be induced eventually to "legislate" away the privileges of the class which maintain army, navy, and police to conserve such privileges; the S.L.P. of America had hitherto consistently opposed the S.P. of America in that vigourously picturesque style which their British comrades (the S.L.P.) seek vainly to imitate.

But the S.L.P. of America has recently clamoured for "Unity." Its National Executive Committee resolved, among other things, "That if conference succeeds in agreeing on conditions for uniting the two parties, steps be immediately taken that one joint National Convention be held to adopt a platform, constitution and resolutions, to nominate candidates, etc."

The S.P. of America has unceremoniously— through their Executive, without consulting the rank and file on such a momentous issue, quite in the style of the secret junta which "guides" the S.D.P. of England, rejected the overtures.

The Weekly People of March 28th contains an article entitled "Unity" from the pen of its editor, the veteran fighter, De Leon.

It is significant of much that the editor of the ofiicial organ of a party which—rightly enough —urges the necessity of "discipline" should in that organ, through seven good fat columns, assert that his contribution is "independent." "I speak from this independent platform as one of the many people active in the Socialist movement. I do not here represent the S.L.P."

It is unnecessary to do more than quote from the report of a meeting held "under the auspices of the S.L.P." on the 11th March in New York, to show the utter confusion that reigns since the birth of the S.L.P's unfortunate offspring— the parentage of which it now vainly endeavours to repudiate. The lecturer stated "De Leon showed an absolute lack of knowledge of Industrial Unionism." De Leon—unwittingly endorsing our declaration in the Manifesto with regard to "Industrial Unionism,"—charged the lecturer with using the language of "veiled dynamitism," that is, of enunciating the principles of Anarchy.

Now what bearing have these things on the "Unity" question? They constitute the very germ and essence of the question as it affects the S.L.P. De Leon bases his argument for "unity" on the ground, mainly, that the Stutgart International Congress has "thrown a bridge across the chasm" which separated the warring American factions (the trophe, an you please, is De Leon's). The declaration was "seriously defective," nevertheless, in a new-found fervour of loyalty to a Congress which includes "Socialistic" freaks of all descriptions—including the "Rudimentary Zionist-Socialists," he sees the hope of uniting for common action, "Militant Socialism to-day sees in Unionism a fact of greater moment to the Revolution than the conquest of a few seats in the political parliaments." "Therefore, walk into my I.W.W. parlour (it isn't really my parlour, you know) and we can compose all our little differences. "Nay, my pretty little flies, I will e'en merge my personality into your political reflex, which you shall project when in the web." The succulent lamb is merged into the commanding personality of the lion, but subsequent investigation fails to discover traces of lamb.

The plea put forward in the article on "Unity" that before the day of revolution, simultaneously with the action of straight, revolutionary bodies, "just so necessary may be the looser methods" of parties — which the S.L.P. is still prepared to "clear the decks" for — the suggestion that it may be found to be but "a matter of the practical distribution of functions" marks perhaps the lowest point to which the S.L.P. has fallen through its dallying with Anarchy, and its impatience to gain adherents to "Socialism" by the offering of palliatives in the shape of bettered conditions for the worker. "See if you do not believe that the life of the lumber worker may be improved, shorter hours established, etc." (Weekly People, 21/3/08.) "If a union could step into the field that could weld the whole of the workers of the building industry into a solid mass it would soon attract members, and by winning strikes, organise far more men than are organised to-day." (Industrial Unionist, March '08.)

The fundamental error underlying Industrial Unionism as understood by its advocates has been well exposed by Comrade Fitzgerald (Socialist Standard, Oct. '06), who, debating the question of Industrial Unionism with a representative of the British S.L.P. said, "The mere adoption of a Socialist preamble does not constitute a union a Socialist union." The declaration on paper of a Revolutionary object, it should hardly be necessary to remind the S.L.P., is no guarantee of its aiming at genuine performance. Fitzgerald clinched that matter once and for all by quoting the words of a delegate to the first Convention of the I.W.W. at Chicago. "We are here as working men, and as such we do not recognise the Socialist or any other 'ist."

Further, it will usually be found that a "common purpose " is almost certain to be followed by common action. The "Fabian" and "Clarion" school of "Socialist" for instance is sometimes thoughtlessly credited with the "purpose" of establishing a Socialist Republic. An acquaintance with "A Modern Utopia" "The Sorcery Shop" and other Utopian twaddle of that description will reveal the gulf that separates the "purpose" of Utopists from that of genuine Socialists.

Unity is only possible on the lines laid down by the S.P.G.B. in the January number of the Socialist Standard, 1906, in a communication addressed to the International Socialist Bureau. "That admission to future International Socialist Congresses shall be open only to all avowed Socialist bodies that accept the essential principles of Socialism, i.e., Socialisation of the means of production and distribution, union and international action of workers, Socialist conquest of the public powers by the proletariat organised as a class party recognising and proclaiming the class war. adopting an attitude of hostility under all circumstances to all sections of the capitalist party."

No one recognises the signal services that De Leon has rendered to the proletariat more than the S.P.G.B., no one so ready to recognise the sterling worth of the rank and file of both English and American S.L.P. The more urgent becomes our duty to seek the destruction of organisations which will inevitably commit their members to a sojourn in the dreary wilderness of Reform, or land them in the slimy bog of Anarchy.

A. Reginald

Editorial: Our Annual Conference. (1907)

Party News from the April 1907 issue of the Socialist Standard

The Third Annual Conference of The Socialist Party of Great Britain gathered at the Communist Club on Friday, March 29th. Nineteen delegates representing ten branches and a considerable number of the Party membership were in attendance when the General Secretary, W. Gifford, called the meeting to order and asked for the election of provisional chairman. Comrade R. H. Kent was finally elected. Three delegates representing two other branches subsequently arrived.

H. Crump and A. Pearson were deputed to act as stewards and tellers and F. Leigh, T. Dix, and J. Lewis formed the Credentials Committee.

Attention having been called to the presence of several non-members of the Party, it was decided on the motion of A. Pearson, seconded by Witcher, that the Conference be open, as usual, to the public.

Comrades R. Kent and McManus were then appointed chairman and vice-chairman of the Conference respectively.

The Gen. Secretary then read the E.C. Report to the Party as follows:—

1. —Since last Conference 46 meetings of the E.C. have been held. (Attendances followed.)
2. —Although complete returns are not yet to hand we are pleased to report a steady increase in the membership and influence of the Party. Over 100 new members have been enrolled during the year, and correspondence and propaganda have been carried well into the provinces. The “Socialist Standard” has also increased its circulation in the provinces, largely owing to about 150 copies per month being supplied to Public Libraries, and to the active work of comrades in various parts of England and Scotland. The Bexley Heath Branch has been dissolved and a new branch has been formed at Woolwich.
3. —The first of a series of pamphlets has been issued, entitled: “From Handicraft to Capitalism,” and has had a ready sale. Further pamphlets are in course of preparation. The first edition of the Manifesto has been completely exhausted and a new edition will be issued shortly.
4. —Borough and County Council elections have been contested in Battersea and Tooting with results as satisfactory as could be expected.
5. —Classes for the training of speakers and the study of economics have been formed at Head Office and at branches, which it is hoped will prove excellent agencies for strengthening the Party as a militant propagandist organisation
6. —Four Party meetings of London members were held to discuss our attitude towards Trades Unionism, but the resolutions carried at these meetings were defeated on being submitted to a vote of he Party.
7. — Arising out of a dispute with the Islington Branch resulting in the expulsion of several members. a Party meeting was held at which an endeavour was made to reopen the whole matter, but this the meeting refused to allow.
8. —The question of the enlargement of the Party Organ was also considered and referred to a Party vote. The item appears on the Conference agenda.
9. —The decision of the Party to adopt uniform stationery has not been given effect to, owing to lack of funds.
10. —Owing to evidence of disorganisation in the Peckham Branch representatives of the E.C. have been sent to consult with the branch membership, and it is hoped that good results will accrue.
11. —The E.C., having been called upon, has ruled the Clarion Cycling Club, in view of its object as printed in its constitution and rules, to be a political organisation antagonistic to our Party.
12. —A libel action against the Party is pending, in which two comrades have been made representative defendants, but it is improbable that the case will be heard before Easter.
13. —The E.C. would draw special attention to the Party’s liabilities, which amount to about £25 in excess of assets. As this is all owing to Jacomb Bros , it is hoped that efforts will be made to entirely liquidate the debt within a very short time.

W. Gifford, Gen. Sec.

March 15th, 1907.

The E. C. statement was then discussed paragraph by paragraph.

On clause 10 the Secretary reported the reasons why the E.C. had decided to take action. Leigh and Harris moved that further discussion be deferred until after amendments to rules had been dealt with.

McManus and Waller moved as an amendment “that the Peckham Branch be dissolved and a new branch be formed by those who still adhere to the letter and spirit of the Party—subject to a Party vote.”

The amendment was lost by 11 to 3.
The resolution was carried by 14 to 4.
The adoption of the E.C. Report was passed by 18 to 0.

A. J. M. Gray (Treasurer) presented the balance sheet, which showed that the Party finances were in a satisfactory condition. The only item of indebtedness was to the printer, mainly on The Socialist Standard account; but this was being reduced by the method adopted by the E.C. of systematic collections of special donations. Contributions to this special fund were appealed for and branches were urged to see that payment for Party Organ supplies was made within the month of issue. Adoption of Treasurer’s and Auditors’ reports was carried unanimously.

The following were announced as the new Executive Committee:—

Comrades A. Anderson. H. Crump, J. H. Day, T. Dix, A. J. M. Gray, W. Gifford, F. Hawes, Killick, McManus, Neuman, H. Young, F. C. Watts. 

General Secretary: R. H. Kent; Treasurer: J. Kent; Auditor: H. Crump.

AMENDMENTS TO RULES.

Rule 1. Edmonton moved (a) to delete the words from “be" to “and” inclusive, line 1, and (b) delete the word “policy” line 2.

First section carried by 15 to 7. Second section carried by 18 to 4.

Rule 8. Edmonton moved to delete the word “ Policy.” Carried by 18 to 4.

Rule 10. Fulham moved to add after “ 1d.” line 2 “for each financial member per week, unemployed members may be excepted.” Carried, 17 to 5.

Rule 17. Edmonton moved to insert after “conference” line 2, “delegate meeting." Carried, 17 to 5.

Rule 19. Edmonton moved (a) to delete the word “policy’’ line 2; (b) insert after the word “Party” line 2, “or detrimental to the interests of .the Party as a whole” (c) delete, line 8, all words after “concerned ” and substitute “the findings of the delegate meeting or conference shall be submitted to a Party vote, the result of which shall be final.”

Clause (a) carried, 16 to 6; clause (b) carried, 15 to 7 ; clause (c) carried, 13 to 9.

Rule 20. West Ham moved to add after “Treasurer ” the word “Organiser”. Carried, 13 to 9.

Rule 25. Edmonton moved to delete the words "and additional items” in lines 4 and 5. Carried, 9 to 8. A card vote being called for, there voted for 72, against 31.

Rule 26. West Ham moved to add “any member—unless disqualified under Rule 3—present at any branch meeting held prior to the date fixed for the return of the voting papers, shall be entitled to have his or her vote recorded." Carried, 17 to 2.

New Rule. West Ham moved “No member shall be put forward for any political office until he or she has satisfactorily passed an examination test to be drawn up by the E.C.” Carried, 22 to 0.

The deferred business relating to the position of the Peckham Branch was then taken, several members of the branch representing both sides in the dispute being present. Leigh (Watford) moved “that the E.C. take steps to deal with the Peckham Branch under Rule 19 as amended.” Lobb (Tottenham) seconded.

Blewett (Battersea) moved amendment “that the E.C. be instructed to depute three of its members to re-organise the Peckham Brandi.” Witcher seconded.

After exhaustive discussion the vote was taken. The amendment was lost by 16 against 3 and the resolution was carried by 14 to 5.

The Conference then adjourned until next morning. During the evening a successful concert and dance was held, the ball being packed to the doors. As entrance was by programme, price 6d., a considerable sum was realised for the purposes of the Party.

The first business of the Conference next day consisted in a discussion upon the International Congress at Stuttgart, which revolved about the question of whether The Socialist Party of Great Britain should seek representation at that Congress and the best means of entering into communication with the known representatives of that uncompromising policy of which the S.P.G.B. are the exponents in Great Britain. In the result Blewett moved and Witcher seconded, “that this Conference of the S.P.G.B. recommends that no delegates be sent to the next International Congress, but that the E.C. use their best endeavour to get in touch with those abroad who occupy our position,"

Dix and Pearson moved as amendment “that the E.C. be instructed to draw up a statement of what they consider necessary as to the best means of establishing relations with other national Parties holding our view—whether by delegation or correspondence.”

The amendment was lost by 9 to 7 and the resolution carried by 10 to 5.

On the question of The Socialist Standard, standing in the name of the Romford Division Branch, Phillips gave the experiences of Fairbrother and himself in the provinces, and the results of their endeavours to induce newsagents and wholesale houses to stock the Party Organ. He urged that special steps be taken to establish a more extensive provincial connection through the newsagents while every possible opportunity be utilised by the Party membership to increase sales, particularly through the same medium in and around the Metropolis, pointing out that the Party cyclists particularly could do good work in this connection.

After much discussion it was carried by 13 to 0 “that it be the first duty of the new E.C. to take action on the lines suggested.”

The following resolution from Edmonton was then submitted, “That Municipal, Parliamentary or other such elections shall only be contested by the Party putting forward the full number of candidates for the vacancies in the particular ward, district or constituency, and no member, though elected, shall take office unless the whole number be elected.” This was carried by 16 votes to 4.

Arising out of this it was moved by Crump and Waller “that all three resolutions on the agenda, if carried, lie referred to a Party vote.” Carried, 13 to 0.

Pearson and Crump then moved that the Party be asked to vote as to whether the Edmonton resolution, if carried by Party Poll, shall be incorporated in the rules of the Party. Carried, 15 to 0.

The resolution in the name of Tottenham “That this Conference re-affirms the position re Trade Unions laid down in Party Manifesto, pages 8, 9 and 10“ then came on, but on the ground that the resolution was unnecessary in view of the poll already taken, Wilkins and Phillips moved next business and it was carried by 9 to 6.

In the absence of the Tooting delegates, Pearson and Gower moved the resolution standing in the name of that Branch, "That this Conference instruct the E.C. to organise a meeting on the first of May and if possible issue a special number of The Socialist Standard for the occasion." On a show of hands this was carried by 7 to  5, but a card vote being called for it was lost be 53 to 25.

The Conference concluded with the singing of "The Red Flag" and "L'Internationale."

Unity in the United States. (1917)

From the March 1917 issue of the Socialist Standard

Once again the Unity cry has been filling the organs of the S.P. of A. and the S.L.P. of A. The latter party through a decreasing membership and vote has given a more willing ear to unity than it once did. But the spectacle of that party negotiating on unity with the organisation they are ever bitterly denouncing is a most ridiculous one.

A vote was taken in the S.P. of A. as to whether they should appoint delegates to meet the Socialist Labour Party’s delegates in conference on terms of unity, and it resulted in favour by 20,000 to 5,000. The Conference sat in New York City on January 6 & 7, 1917. The delegates for the Socialist Party were Louis B. Boudin, Geo. H. Goebel, Chas. H. Maurer, James Oneal and Samuel Beardsley. The Socialist Labour Party delegates: Arthur E. Reimer, Rudolph Katz, Boris Reinstein, Caleb Harrison and Arnold Peterson.

After coming to an agreement on the question of aim and reform policies the question of the attitude towards economic organisation came forward.

The Socialist Labour Party insisted on the following statement being adopted to bind the unified body to Industrial Unionism:

   Recognition and declaration in favor of the fact that the emancipation of the working class from wage slavery cannot be achieved by political action only; and therefore the unqualified acceptance of the fact that it s absolutely indispensable for that purpose to have the working class organised in the economic arena on the lines of what is known in this country as pro-political or Socialist Industrial Unionism; and that consequently, it is the duty of the party of Socialism to teach the essential principles of Industrial Unionism in order to enable the membership to advocate these principles both inside of the existing craft unions—to the extent as it may still be possible—and outside of the same, and thus carry on that educational propaganda which will sooner or later crystallise in a world-wide army of industrially organised workers.
   Declaration to the effect that the proposed united Party condemns the principle of craft unionism which defeats the very objects that the workers, consciously or otherwise, strive to attain.
   Declaration to the effect that the Socialists, while reserving their right to criticise and expose all wrongfully constructed and conducted labor organisations, owe it as a duty to stand on the side of the workmen whenever a bona fide strike or other conflict for improved conditions of labor occurs, either as spontaneous action of the workers or as a result of action taken by any labor organisation whatever.

These resolutions, of course, are unsound. Industrial Unionism is not essential or even useful to working-class emancipation. To call it “Socialist” is misleading as it is not necessary to be a Socialist to join. Styling it pro-political is untrue, as the S.L.U. holds “that the economic arm is the more important, first, because it is indispensable to the revolutionary act and next because it is the frame of the government of the Co-operative Commonwealth.” (“Unity,” by DeLeon. Page 23.) The resolutions advocate boring from within—in the craft unions, a line of action which the S.L.P. never tire of condemning on paper. The Socialist Party delegates refused to accept the whole thing. They offered in its place the complete resolution on economic organisation adopted by the Stuttgart International Congress in 1907. This resolution reads as follows:

  To emancipate the proletariat completely from the bonds of intellectual, political and economic serfdom; the political and economic struggle are alike necessary. If the activity of the Socialist Party is exercised more particularly in the domain of the political struggle of the proletariat, that of the unions displays itself in the domain of the economic struggle of the workers. The Unions and the Party have therefore an equally important task to perform in the struggle for political emancipation. Each of the two organisations has its distinct domain, defined by its nature and within whose borders it should enjoy independent control of its line of action, but there is an ever-widening domain in the proletarian struggle of the classes in which they can reap advantages only by concerted action and by co-operation between the Party and the trade unions. As a consequence the proletarian struggle would be carried on more successfully and with more important results if the relations between the unions and the Party are strengthened without infringing the necessary unity of the trade unions.
  The Congress declares that it is to the interest of the working class in every country that close and permanent relations should be established between the unions and the Party.
   It is the duty of the Party and of the trade unions to render moral support the one to the other and to make use only of those means which may help forward the emancipation of the proletariat. When divergent opinions arise between the two organisations as to the effectiveness of certain tactics they should arrive by discussion at an agreement.
  The unions will not fully perform their duty in the struggle for the emancipation of the workers unless a thoroughly Socialist spirit inspires their policy. It is the duty of the Party to help the unions in their work of raising the workers and of ameliorating their social conditions. In its parliamentary action, the Party must vigorously support the demands of the unions.
   The Congress declares that the development of the capitalist system of production, the increased concentration of the means of production, the growing alliance of the employers, the increasing dependence of particular trades upon the totality of bourgeois society would reduce trade unions to impotency if, concerning themselves about nothing more than trade interests, they took their stand on corporate selfishness and admitted the theory of harmony of interests between labour and capital.
   The Congress is of opinion that the unions will be able to more successfully carry on their struggle against exploitation and oppression, in proportion as their organisations are more unified, as their benefit system is improved, as the funds necessary for their struggle are better supplied, as their members gain a clearer conception of economic relations and are inspired by the Socialist ideal with greater enthusiasm and devotion. 

The S.L.P. delegation wished a clause added to this Stuttgart resolution as follows:

   In line with the above resolution and carrying out the spirit and applying the general principles expressed therein, the United Party declared that the proper application of it to American conditions calls for the Party’s pointing out the fallacies and shortcomings of the craft union form of organisation and the necessity for adopting the Socialist industrial onion form of economic organisation.

Around this resolution much discussion took place. The S.P. delegates claimed that the Stuttgart resolution did not mean industrial unionism. The S.L.P. delegates claimed that it was against craft unionism. “The thing to be done'" said Boris Reinstein (S.L.P. delegate), was to urge the workers to accept class unionism." In spite of this, however, he and other delegates of his party advocated industrial unionism—not class unionism.

“History shows,'’Said Reinstein (S.L.P.), “that no ruled class ever overthrew a ruling class without first gaining economic power, a power which the working class could only develop through industrial unionism.”

Such a statement shows how little the Socialist Labour Party understand history. Economic power depends for its full and complete exercise upon the possession of political sovereignty. And how little the working class could develop economic power by means of industrial unionism is another of “the secrets of the underworld.”

A deadlock was reached on both the S.L.P. and Stuttgart resolutions, 4 votes being given in favour and 4 against.

When they discussed the form of the united organisation the federative plan offered by the S.L.P. and also organic unity of the S.P. of A. was rejected. When Boudin finally drew up a basis for common electoral action the S.L.P. delegates commenced “bargaining” by offering to accept it if the S.P. delegates would accept the S.L.P. resolution on economic action.

On the second day of the Conference the end came. The S.L.P. “bargaining” failed and the S.P. idea of swallowing up the S.L.P. also died. In the editorial of the “Weekly People" (Jan. 13,1917) from which issue all the resolutions quoted have been taken, the S.L.P. claim that rock upon which the Unity Conference went to pieces was industrial unionism. Thereby showing conclusively that the thing which keeps the two parties apart is nothing to do with Socialist policy or Socialist aims—Industrial Unionism being a side issue of no value to working-class emancipation.

The attitude taken by our Party years ago still bolds good—that only by having a Socialist membership, and therefore a Socialist policy, can a real Socialist Party be secured. Neither the S.P. or S.L.P. of America fill the requirements.

Adolph Kohn