Part 10 (1/2)

To enlarge the possible operations of the syndicats, the government also introduced a bill into the Chamber (November 14, 1899) which contained several modifications of the law of 1884. This bill proposed to extend the commercial capacities of the syndicat and to grant the syndicat the rights of a juridical person.

To complete the series of measures which were to impart a peaceful character to the syndical movement, M. Millerand introduced into the chamber a bill (November 15, 1900) on the regulation of strikes and on arbitration. This law-project proposed a complicated mechanism for the settlement of economic conflicts. It hinged on the principle that strikes should be decided by secret ballot and by a majority vote renewed at brief intervals by all workingmen concerned; permanent arbitration boards in the industrial establishments were part of the mechanism.[130]

[130] Only the most important measures of M. Millerand are mentioned; they do not by any means exhaust his legislative activities during this period.

Toward this series of labor laws the Congress of Lyons was to define its att.i.tude. The principle of the Superior Council of Labor was accepted by a majority of 258 against 205 votes (5 blank); the project on the regulation of strikes and on arbitration was rejected by a unanimous vote minus five; the Councils of Labor proposition was rejected by a majority of 279 against 175 (18 blank).

The discussion on the labor laws brought out the fact that the idea of ”direct action” had undergone further modifications as a result of the policy of the government. M. Waldeck-Rousseau was denounced by the speakers as ”a clever defender of the interests of the bourgeoisie” who wished merely to stop the offensive movement of the workingmen.[131]

The legislative measures of the ”pseudo-socialist minister”,[132]

Millerand, were interpreted as schemes for restraining the revolutionary action of the syndicats.[133] The workingmen were warned that, if they accepted the laws, they would ”reinforce a power which they wanted to destroy”.[134] They were reminded that the main function of the syndicat was to organize the workmen for their final emanc.i.p.ation which presupposes the ”abolition of the wage-system” and that all ”so-called labor laws” would only r.e.t.a.r.d the hour of final liberation.

[131] _XII Congres National Corporatif_ (VI de la C. G. T.), Lyons, 1901, p. 110.

[132] _Ibid._, p. 114.

[133] _Ibid._, p. 210.

[134] _Ibid._, p. 112.

The revolutionary elements of the Congress did not deny, however, the possibility or the desirability of reforms. They insisted only upon particular methods of obtaining reforms and upon a particular kind of reforms. They rejected all peaceful discussion with employers because the interests of employers and of workingmen were held to be distinct and antagonistic. They did not want an ”economic parliamentarism”[135]

which would necessarily take the sting out of the workingmen's weapons and deprive the syndicats of their force. They wanted such reforms only as should ”undermine the foundations”[136] of existing society and which should advance the movement for ”integral emanc.i.p.ation” by strengthening the forces and the organization of the workingmen.

[135] _Ibid._, p. 218.

[136] _Ibid._, p. 110.

Such reforms could be obtained only ”independently of all parliamentarism”,[137] by the workingmen organized in their syndicats displaying all their initiative, manifesting all their energies, relying only upon themselves and not upon intermediaries. Only in this way would the syndicats wrest ”piece by piece from capitalistic society reforms the application of which would finally give the exploited cla.s.s the force which is indispensable in order to bring about the social revolution”.[138]

[137] _XI Congres National Corporatif_, p. 114.

[138] _Ibid._, p. 119.

These ideas showed the further application which the principle of ”direct action” was given by the revolutionary elements in the syndicats. The syndicats were not only to carry on their struggle ”directly” against employers by strikes, boycotts and _sabotage_, but also against the State, and not only against the State appearing as the ”enemy of labor”, but also against the State wis.h.i.+ng to become the protector and benefactor of the workingmen. This hostility to the State and to its reform-legislation marked a further accentuation of the ideas of revolutionary syndicalism.

The Congress of Lyons took, also, a decided stand on the relations of the syndicats to political action. Under ”political action” of course the action of the Socialist parties was meant. After the foundation of the General Confederation of Labor certain important changes had taken place in the socialist movement of France which could not but have their effect upon the syndicats.

In 1893 the socialist parties had their first big success in the general elections. They obtained about 600,000 votes[139] and elected over 50 deputies. The socialist deputies in the Chamber const.i.tuted a Parliamentary Group--_Union Socialiste_--which acted in common. This strengthened the tendency toward union which had already manifested itself, during the elections, when the Socialists had entered into unions among themselves.

[139] A. Hamon, _Le Socialisme et le Congres de Londres_ (Paris, 1897), p. 11.

The unity in action was further made possible by a unity in views which was becoming more and more manifest. After 1892, when the Guesdists obtained a large number of votes in the munic.i.p.al elections and gained a number of munic.i.p.alities, their ideas on some of the most important points of their program began to change. In 1894, at their Congress of Nantes, the Guesdists elaborated a detailed program of reforms designed to win the votes of the agricultural population. This program made no mention of the collective appropriation of the soil; on the contrary, it stated that, ”in the agricultural domain, the means of production, which is the soil, is in many places still in the possession of the producers themselves as individual property” and that ”if this state of conditions, characterized by peasant proprietors.h.i.+p, must inevitably disappear, socialism must not precipitate its disappearance.”[140] With similar promises of reform the Guesdists addressed other cla.s.ses of the population: artisans, small merchants and the lower strata of the middle cla.s.ses.

[140] L. Blum, _Congres Ouvriers et Socialistes_, p. 146.

Formerly ardent revolutionists, they now began to emphasize the legal aspect of their activity and the emanc.i.p.ating influence of universal suffrage. Jules Guesde himself in his speeches in the Chamber of Deputies on various occasions expressed his belief that universal suffrage was the instrument with which all questions might be peacefully solved,[141] and that nothing but legal weapons would throw the Republic into the hands of the socialist army. G. Deville, then one of the princ.i.p.al theorists of the party, affirmed in 1896 that the only actual task of the party was to increase the number of socialist electors and representatives.[142] With the affirmation of the emanc.i.p.ating significance of universal suffrage the importance of parliamentary action was more and more emphasized.

[141] _Chambre des Deputes, Debats Parlementaires_; July 11, 1895; November 22, 1895.

[142] Deville, _Principes Socialistes_.

Thus the ”revolutionary” socialists were approaching the reformist elements composed of Broussists and of Independents. In 1896 this _rapprochement_ was manifested at the banquet of Saint Mande arranged on the occasion of the success obtained by the socialists during the munic.i.p.al elections of that year. All socialist parties took part in it and Millerand delivered a speech in which he outlined the common points of the socialist program. This program emphasized the peaceful and evolutionary character of socialism: ”We address ourselves only to universal suffrage,” said Millerand, ... ”In order to begin the socialization of the means of production, it is necessary and sufficient for the Socialist party to pursue with the help of universal suffrage the conquest of the political powers.”[143] Guesde, present at the banquet, approved and ”applauded” the definition of Socialism given by Millerand.