CHARACTER AND CONDITIONS OF REVOLUTIONARY SYNDICALISM
The history of the General Confederation of Labor as told in the
preceding chapters has brought out in a general way the character of
revolutionary syndicalism and the conditions which have influenced its
rise and development. It remains now in this last chapter to emphasize
the principal points and to strengthen them by a more complete analysis
of facts and conditions.
It has been maintained throughout this work that revolutionary
syndicalism was created by a _bloc_ of revolutionary elements in the
Confederation. This character of a _bloc_ has been denied by many. Those
hostile to the Confederation are anxious to create the impression that
the latter is exclusively the creation and the tool of the anarchists.
Others more or less impartial fail to acknowledge the part played in the
movement by the non-anarchist elements. Some anarchists themselves are
only too glad to be considered the creators of the movement and to
maintain a view which is a tribute to their organizing ability and to
their influence.
Many revolutionary syndicalists, however, protest against being
considered anarchists. Some of them are active members of the Unified
Socialist Party. Others do not belong to the Socialist party, but have
never been connected with the Anarchists. They are revolutionary
syndicalists, "pure and simple." And these two other elements are by no
means less influential in the Confederation than the Anarchists.
The three elements enumerated have somewhat different ways of regarding
revolutionary syndicalism. To the anarchists revolutionary syndicalism
is but a partial application of anarchist ideas. M. Yvetot, secretary of
the section of Bourses, said at the recent Congress of Toulouse (1910):
"I am reproached with confusing syndicalism and anarchism. It is not my
fault if anarchism and syndicalism have the same ends in view. The
former pursues the integral emancipation of the individual; the latter
the integral emancipation of the workingman. I find the whole of
syndicalism in anarchism."[214]
[214] _La Vie Ouvrière_, 20 Oct., 1910, p. 483; _XVII Congrès National
Corporatif_ (Toulouse, 1910), p. 226.
To the revolutionary socialists in the Confederation syndicalism is the
primary and fundamental form of revolutionary socialism. It does not
exclude, however, other forms; on the contrary, it must be completed by
the political organization of the Socialist party, because it has no
answer of its own to many social problems.
The third group of revolutionary syndicalists regards revolutionary
syndicalism as self-sufficing and independent of both anarchism and
socialism. This group, like the first, emphasizes the fact that there is
an irreconcilable antagonism between syndicalism and political
socialism. "It is necessary," writes Jouhaux, secretary of the
Confederation, "that the proletariat should know that between
parliamentary socialism, which is tending more and more toward a simple
democratization of existing social forms, and syndicalism, which pursues
the aim of a complete social transformation, there is not only
divergence of methods, but particularly divergence of aims."[215]
[215] L. Jouhaux, _Le Terrassier_, 20 June, 1911.
Those who consciously call themselves revolutionary syndicalists belong
to one of the groups described, and the three groups constitute the
_bloc_ spoken of above. To understand revolutionary syndicalism means to
understand this _bloc_ of revolutionary elements, how it was made
possible, why it is maintained, and what conditions have secured for it
the leadership in the General Confederation of Labor.
It has been shown in the preceding chapters that since 1830 a
considerable part of the French workingmen, the so-called "militant"
workingmen, have always cherished the hope of a "complete" or "integral"
emancipation which should free them from the wage-system and from the
economic domination of the employer. The desire of independence had
guided the life of the journeyman under the guild-system, and its birth
under modern economic conditions is natural enough to need no
explanation. But while under the guild-system this desire had an
individualistic character, under the technical conditions of the present
time it necessarily led to collectivist ideas. With the development of
highly expensive means of production, only an insignificant number of
workingmen could hope to become economically independent by individual
action, and the only way to attain economic freedom and equality for all
pointed to the collective appropriation of the means of production and
to the collective management of industrial activities.
The insistence on economic freedom--in the sense indicated--runs through
all the literature of the French Labor Movement. It is not only and not
so much the inequality of wealth, the contrasts of distribution that
stimulate the militant workingmen to their collectivist hopes, as it is
the protest against the "arbitrariness" of the employer and the ideal of
a "free workshop." To attain the latter is the main thing and forms the
program of the General Confederation as formulated in the first clause
of its statutes.
The sensitiveness to economic inferiority is increased in the French
militant workingmen by the fact that in a country like France economic
distinctions are combined with social distinctions. Owing to the
traditions of the past, economic classes are separated by a number of
other elements, in which intellectual, social and other influences
combine and which transform the economic classes into social classes.
The aspiration towards economic equality increases, therefore, in volume
and becomes a striving after social equality.
The historical traditions of France combined with the impatience for
emancipation explain the revolutionary spirit of the French socialist
workingman. All who have come into contact with French life have
convinced themselves of the power which the revolutionary traditions of
the past exert over the people. The French workingman is brought up in
the admiration of the men of the Great Revolution; his modern history is
full of revolutionary secret societies, of insurrections, and of
revolutionary struggles. He cherishes the memory of the Revolution of
1848, his indignation is aroused by the story of the Days of June, his
pity and sympathy are stimulated by the events of the Commune. Looking
backward into the history of the past century and a half, he can only
get the feeling of political instability, and the conviction is
strengthened in him that "his" revolution will come just as the
revolution of the "Third-Estate" had come. Combined with the desire to
attain the "integral" emancipation as soon as possible, these conditions
engender in him the revolutionary spirit.[216]
[216] On the peculiar character of French history see Adams, _Growth of
the French Nation_; Berry, _France since Waterloo_; Barrett Wendell,
_France of To-day_.
The revolutionary spirit predisposes the socialist workingman to a
skeptical attitude toward parliamentary action which rests on
conciliation and on compromise and is slow in operation. He seeks for
other methods which seem to promise quicker results. The methods
themselves may change; they were insurrection once, they are now the
general strike. But the end they serve remains the same: to keep up the
hope of a speedy liberation.
The distrust of parliamentary methods has been strengthened in the
French socialist workingman by another fact. The French workingmen have
seen their political leaders rise to the very top, become Ministers and
Premiers (_e. g._, Millerand, Viviani, Briand), and then turn against
their "comrades" of old. The feeling has been thereby created in the
socialist workingmen that parliamentary methods are merely a means to a
brilliant career for individuals who know how to make use of them.
The mistrust of "politicians" finds some nourishment in the fact that
the political leaders of the Socialist movement are generally the
"intellectuals," between whom and the workingmen there is also some
antagonism. The "intellectuals" are thrown out upon the social arena
principally by the lower and middle bourgeoisie and generally enter the
liberal professions. But whether lawyer, writer, doctor or teacher, the
French "intellectual" sooner or later enters the field of "politics"
which allures him by the vaster possibilities it seems to offer. In
fact, the "intellectual" has always been a conspicuous figure in the
history of French Socialism. As a socialist poet, Pierre Dupont, sang,
"Socialism has two wings,
The student and the workingman."
And as the socialist ideas have spread, the number of
"intellectuals" in the socialist movement has been constantly
increasing.
The "two wings" of the Socialists, however, cannot perfectly adapt
themselves to one another. The "intellectual" generally lacks the
"impatience for deliverance" which characterizes the socialist
workingman. The "intellectual" is bound by more solid ties to the
_status quo_; his intellectual preoccupations predispose him to a calmer
view of things, to regard society as a slow evolutionary process.
Besides, the "intellectual" takes pride in the fact that he supplies
"the proletariat with fresh elements of enlightenment and progress"; he
is inclined, therefore, to dominate the workingman as his "minor
brother", and to advocate methods which secure his own predominant part
in the movement. Parliamentary action is the field best adapted to his
character and powers. The socialist workingman, on the other hand,
protests against the tendencies of the "intellectual", particularly
against the dominating impulses of the latter. He is anxious to limit
the powers of his leaders, if possible, and to create such forms of
organization as shall assure his own independence.
When the syndicats began to develop in France, the revolutionary
workingmen seized upon them as a form of organization particularly
adapted to their demands. The syndicat was an organization which could
take up the ideal of social emancipation; in the general strike, which
the syndicat seemed to carry within itself, there was a method of speedy
liberation; the syndicat excluded the "intellectuals" and above all by
its "direct action" it maintained and strengthened the revolutionary
spirit and safeguarded the revolutionary ideal from the compromises and
dangers to which politics and the parliamentary socialists subjected
it.
These conditions: the hope of social emancipation, the impatience for
deliverance, the revolutionary spirit, and the defiance of the
"intellectuals" and of the "politicians," gave and continue to give life
to revolutionary syndicalism. They brought into being the "revolutionary
_bloc_" in the General Confederation of Labor and maintain it there. Of
course, differences of temperament and shadings of opinion exist. On the
one extreme are those who are most vehement in their propaganda and who
combat the Socialist party; on the other, are the revolutionary
socialists who are disposed to co-operate with the parliamentary
socialists, but who want to have an independent organization to fall
back upon in case of disagreement with the political party. But
differing in details, the revolutionary elements agree in the main
points and they stamp upon the Confederation the character which it
bears and which is described in the terms "revolutionary syndicalism."
The opponents of the revolutionary syndicalists claim that the latter
are followed only by a minority in the General Confederation and that
they maintain their leadership by means of the existing system of
representation and by other more or less arbitrary devices. This
statement, however, cannot be proved in any satisfactory way.
The best way of obtaining the exact number of revolutionary syndicalists
in the Confederation would seem to be by means of an analysis of the
votes taken at the Congresses. This method, however, is defective for
several reasons. In the first place, not all the syndicats adhering to
the Confederation are represented at the Congresses. At the Congress of
Bourges (1904), 1,178 syndicats out of 1,792 were represented; at the
Congress of Amiens, 1,040 out of 2,399; at the Congress of Marseilles,
1,102 out of 2,586, and at the Congress of Toulouse, 1,390 out of 3,012.
It is evident, therefore, that even if all the votes were taken
unanimously, they would still express the opinion of less than half the
syndicats of the Confederation.
In the second place, the votes of the Confederation being taken by
syndicats, to get the exact figures it would be necessary to know how
many syndicats in each federation are revolutionary or not, and what is
the proportional strength of both tendencies in each syndicat. This is
impossible in the present state of statistical information furnished by
the Confederation.
At the Congress of Amiens, for instance, the vote approving the report
of the Confederal Committee (Section of Federation) stood 815 against
106 (18 blanks). This vote is important, because to approve or to reject
the report meant to approve or to reject the ideas by which the General
Confederation is guided.
Now, an analysis of the vote at Amiens shows that while some
organizations voted solidly for the Confederal Committee, none voted
solidly against it and that the votes of many organizations were
divided. But even the number of those represented by the unanimous vote
of their syndicats cannot in the most cases be ascertained. For
instance, the agricultural syndicats cast their 28 votes for the
Confederal Committee; the report of the Confederal Committee gives the
Federation of Agricultural Laborers 4,405 members; but the same report
says that the Federation consisted of 106 syndicats; of these 106
syndicats only 28 were represented at the Congress, and how many members
they represented there is no possibility of ascertaining. The same is
true of those Federations in which the syndicats did not cast the same
vote.
This difficulty is felt by those who try to prove by figures that the
Confederation is dominated by a minority. M. Ch. Franck, for instance,
calculates that at the Congress of Marseilles 46 organizations with 716
mandates representing 143,191 members obtained the majority for the
_statu quo_ against the proposition of proportional representation;
while the minority consisted of 15 organizations with 379 mandates
representing 145,440 members. In favor of the anti-militaristic
resolution, he calculates further, 33 organizations with 670 mandates
representing 114,491 members obtained the majority against 19
organizations with 406 mandates representing 126,540 members. But he is
compelled to add immediately: "These figures have no absolute value,
because we have taken each organization in its entirety, while in the
same federation some syndicats have not voted with the majority"; he
thinks that the proportion remains nevertheless the same because he did
not take into consideration the divisions on each side.[217]
[217] _Op. cit._, pp. 345-6.
The last assumption, however, is arbitrary, because the syndicats
dissenting on the one side may have been more numerous than those not
voting with the majority on the other side; the whole calculation,
besides, is fallacious, because it takes the figures of the federations
in their entirety, while only a part of the syndicats composing them
took part in the votes.
The attempt, therefore, to estimate the exact number of the
revolutionary syndicalists in the Confederation must be given up for the
present. The approximate estimate on either side can be given. According
to M. Pawlowski,[218] 250,000 members of the Confederation (out of
400,000) repudiate the revolutionary doctrine; the revolutionary
syndicalists, on the other hand, claim a majority of two-thirds for
themselves. The impartial student must leave the question open.
[218] A. Pawlowski, _La Confédération Générale du Travail_ (Paris,
1910), p. 51.
It must be pointed out, however, that the system of representation which
exists now in the Confederation affects both revolutionary and reformist
syndicalists in a more or less equal degree. At the Congress of Amiens,
for instance, the _Fédération du Livre_, with its 10,000 members, had
135 votes; the Railway Syndicat, with its 24,275 members, had only 36
votes; these two organizations were among the "reformists" who combated
the Confederal Committee. On the other hand, the revolutionary
Federation of Metallurgy had 84 votes for its 14,000 members, but the
Federation of Marine, which is also revolutionary, disposed of six votes
only for its 12,000 members. The revolutionary syndicalists, therefore,
may be right in their assertion that proportional representation would
not change the leadership of the Confederation. This belief is
strengthened in them by the fact that in all so-called "reformist"
organizations, as the _Fédération du Livre_, the Railway Syndicat, etc.,
there are strong and numerous revolutionary minorities.
It is often asserted that only the small syndicats, mostly belonging to
the small trades, follow the revolutionary syndicalists. This assertion,
however, is inexact. An examination of the syndicats which are
considered revolutionary shows that some of them are very large and that
others belong to the most centralized industries of France. For
instance, the Federation of Building Trades is the most revolutionary
organization in the Confederation; at the same time it is the most
numerous, and its members pay the highest dues (after the _Fédération
du Livre_) in France.[219] The revolutionary Federation of Metallurgy is
also one of the large organizations in the Confederation and belongs to
an industry which is one of the most centralized in France. The total
horse-power of machines used in the metallurgic industries has increased
from 175,070 in 1891 to 419,128 in 1906; the number of establishments
has diminished from 4,642 in 1891 to 4,544 in 1906; that is, the total
horse-power of machinery used in every industrial establishment has
increased during this period from 38 to 92;[220] the number of
workingmen per industrial establishment has also increased from 508 in
1896 to 697 in 1901 and to 711 in 1906. In fact the metallurgic industry
occupies the second place after the mining industry which is the most
centralized in France.[221]
[219] _Mouvement Socialiste_, May, 1911.
[220] E. Thery, _Les Progrès Économiques de la France_ (Paris, 1909), p.
181.
[221] _Journal des Économistes_, Jan., 1911, p. 133.
A diversity of conditions prevails in the industries to which the other
revolutionary organizations belong. On the other hand, the so-called
reformist organizations, the Federation of Mines, the _Fédération du
Livre_, the Federation of Employees, differ in many respects and are
determined in their policy by many considerations and conditions which
are peculiar to each one of them.
The influence of the revolutionary syndicalists, therefore, can be
explained not by special technical conditions, but by general conditions
which are economic, political and psychological. To bring out the
relation of these conditions to the syndicalist doctrine it is necessary
to analyze the latter into its constituent elements and to discuss them
one by one.
The fundamental condition which determines the policy of "direct
action" is the poverty of French syndicalism. Except the _Fédération du
Livre_, only a very few federations pay a more or less regular strike
benefit; the rest have barely means enough to provide for their
administrative and organizing expenses and can not collect any strike
funds worth mentioning. In 1908, for instance, there were 1,073 strikes;
of these 837 were conducted by organized workingmen. Only in 46 strikes
was regular assistance assured for the strikers, and in 36 cases only
was the assistance given in money.[222] The French workingmen,
therefore, are forced to fall back on other means during strikes. Quick
action, intimidation, _sabotage_, are then suggested to them by their
very situation and by their desire to win.
[222] _Statistique des Grèves_, 1909, vi-vii.
The lack of financial strength explains also the enthusiasm and the
sentiments of general solidarity which characterize French strikes. An
atmosphere of enthusiasm must be created in order to keep up the
fighting spirit in the strikers. To the particular struggle in any one
trade a wider and more general significance must be attributed; it must
be interpreted as a partial manifestation of a more general
class-struggle. In this way the determination to struggle on is
strengthened in those who strike and a moral justification is created
for an appeal to the solidarity of all workingmen. These appeals are
made constantly during strikes. Subscription lists are kept in the
_Bourses du Travail_, in the Confederal Committee on Strikes, and are
opened in the workingmen's and socialist newspapers whenever any big
strike occurs.
New means to make up for the lack of financial resources are constantly
devised. Of these means two which have come into existence within
recent years are the _soupes communistes_ and the "exodus of children."
The _soupes communistes_ are organized by the _Bourses du Travail_ and
consist of meals distributed to those on strike. The _soupes
communistes_ permit the feeding of a comparatively large number of
strikers at small expense. Distribution occurs at certain points. The
workingmen, if they wish, may take their meals home. The last
Conferences of the section of Bourses have discussed the question how to
organize these _soupes communistes_ more systematically and as cheaply
as possible.
The "exodus of children" consists in sending away the children of the
strikers to workingmen of other towns while the strike is going on. It
has been used during several strikes and attracted widespread attention.
The "exodus of children" relieves the strikers at home and creates
sympathy for them over the country at large.
Financial weakness has also led French syndicats in recent years to
reconsider the question of co-operation. Various federations have
expressed themselves at their federal congresses in favor of
"syndicalist co-operatives" in which all associates are at the same time
members of the syndicat and organized on a communist basis. The main
argument brought forward in favor of such co-operatives is the support
they could furnish to workingmen on strike.
The poverty of the French syndicats is the result of the reluctance of
the French workingmen to pay high dues. In the _Fédération du Livre_,
which has the highest dues, every member pays a little over two francs a
month. In other federations the dues are lower, coming down in some
organizations to 10 centimes a month. In recent years there has been a
general tendency in all federations to increase dues, but the efforts of
the syndicalist functionaries in this direction have met with but slow
and partial success.
The reluctance to high dues is in part the result of the comparatively
low wages which prevail in France. Another factor is the psychology of
the French workingman. "Our impulsive and rebellious (_frondeur_)
temperament," wrote the Commission which organized the Congress of
Montpellier, "does not lend itself to high dues, and if we are always
ready to painful sacrifices of another nature, we have not yet been able
to understand the enormous advantages which would follow from strong
syndicalist treasuries maintained by higher assessments."[223] The
French workingmen are conscious of their peculiar traits, and the
literature of the syndicalist movement is full of both jeremiads and
panegyrics with regard to these traits, according to the speaker and to
the circumstances. The French workingmen recognize that they lack
method, persistence and foresight, while they are sensitive, impulsive
and combative.[224]
[223] _XIII Congrès National Corporatif_, 1902, pp. 30-31.
[224] _X Congrès National Corporatif_, p. 203; _XII Congrès National
Corporatif_, pp. 15, 29, 44.
The result of this psychology is not only poor syndicats, but syndicats
weak in other respects. Many syndicats are but loosely held together,
are easily dissolved and are composed of a more or less variable and
shifting membership. The instability is increased of course by the
absence of benevolent features in the syndicats. The _Fédération du
Livre_ alone pays sick and other benefits.
The weakness of the syndicats predisposes the French workingmen to more
and more generalized forms of struggle. Syndicats on strike impelled by
the desire to increase their forces try to involve as many trades and
workingmen as possible and to enhance their own chances by enlarging
the field of struggle. This is why such general movements, as the
movement for an eight-hour day in 1906, described in the preceding
chapter, are advocated by the syndicats. The latter feel that in order
to gain any important demand they must be backed by as large a number of
workingmen as possible. But in view of their weakness, the syndicats can
start a large movement only by stirring up the country, by formulating
some general demand which appeals to all workingmen. The same conditions
explain in part the favor which the idea of the general strike has found
in the syndicats.
Such forms of struggle must necessarily bring the syndicats into
conflict with the State, particularly in France where the State is
highly centralized and assumes so many functions. With a people so
impulsive as the French, the intervention of the forces of the State in
the economic struggles must inevitably lead to collisions of a more or
less serious character. The result is a feeling of bitterness in the
workingmen towards the army, the police and the government in general.
The ground is thus prepared for anti-militaristic, anti-State and
anti-patriotic ideas.
The organized workingmen are a minority of the working-class. Still they
must act as if they were the majority or the entirety of the workingmen.
The contradiction must be smoothed over by some explanation, and the
theory of the "conscious minority" arises to meet the situation. The
weaker the syndicats and the more often they are exposed to the danger
of dissolution the greater the necessity of the theory. A disorganized
syndicat generally leaves behind a handful of militant workingmen
determined to keep up the organization. The theory of the "conscious
minority" is both a stimulus to and a justification for the activities
of these persistent "militants."
To the conditions described the French love of theory, of high-sounding
phrases, and of idealistic formulas must be added. For a Frenchman it is
not sufficient to act under necessity: the act must be generalized into
a principle, the principles systematized, and the system of theory
compressed into concise and catching formulas. And once abstracted,
systematized and formulated, the ideas become a distinct force exerting
an influence in the same direction as the conditions to which they
correspond.
When all this is taken into account, it is easier to understand the
influence of the revolutionary syndicalists. It is insufficient to
explain their leadership by clever machinations of the Confederal
Committee, as M. Mermeix and many others do. It is quite true that the
Confederal Committee tries to maintain its power by all means possible.
It sends out delegates to Federal Congresses, on conference tours over
the country, to assist workingmen on strikes, etc. In most cases it
sends only men who represent the revolutionary ideas of the Committee
and who, therefore, strengthen the influence of the latter by word and
deed. It is also true that in most _Bourses du Travail_ the secretaries
are revolutionary and that they help to consolidate the influence of the
Confederal Committee. But these secretaries have not usurped their
power. They are elected because they have come to the front as speakers,
writers, organizers, strike-leaders, etc. And they could come to the
front only because conditions were such as to make their ideas and
services helpful.
Whatever one's attitude to the Confederation, one must acknowledge the
results it has achieved. The strike statistics of France, given in the
following table, show the following facts:
_Per cent of _Per cent of
_Period_ strikes which strikers who lost
failed_ their strikes_
1890-1899 44.61 38.63
1891-1900 43.86 34.17
1892-1901 42.69 35.42
1893-1902 42.48 31.75
1894-1903 42.13 26.98
1895-1904 40.24 25.09
1896-1905 39.07 23.76
1897-1906 38.05 25.91
1898-1907 38.14 25.37
1899-1908 35.79 25.83
Of course, these results can not be attributed entirely to the action of
the Confederation. On the other hand, the influence of the Confederation
on the improvement of general conditions of employment, on social
legislation, etc., is undeniable. "In all branches of human activity,"
says M. Pawlowski, "wages have risen with a disconcerting and
disquieting rapidity."[225] The agitation for the eight-hour day and the
rising of 1906 hastened the vote on the weekly rest, induced the
government to consider the application of the ten-hour day, popularized
the practice of the "English week," etc.[226]
[225] A. Pawlowski, _La Confédération Générale du Travail_, p. 130.
[226] _Ibid._, p. 123.
Whether the same or better results could have been obtained by
"reformist" methods, is not a question to be considered, because in most
cases the syndicats have no choice. A strike once begun, the character
of the struggle is determined by conditions which exist and not by any
that would be desirable. This is proved by the fact that very often the
so-called "reformist" syndicats carry on their struggles in the same
way and by the same methods as do the revolutionary ones.
The comparative influence of the Confederation explains the fact why the
"reformists" do not leave the organization, though they are bitter in
their opposition to the revolutionists. The "reformists" feel that they
would thereby lose a support which is of value to them. Besides, in many
cases such an act would lead to divisions within the reformist
federations, all of which, as already indicated, contain considerable
revolutionary minorities.
The revolutionary syndicalists, however, are in their turn compelled to
make concessions to those exigences of the labor movement which have
nothing to do with revolutionary ends. Of course, the revolutionary
syndicalists are workingmen and they are interested in the immediate
improvement of economic conditions. But there can be little doubt that
the leaders and the more conscious and pronounced revolutionary
syndicalists are mainly interested in their revolutionary ideal, in the
abolition of capitalism and of the wage-system. The struggles for higher
wages, shorter hours, etc., are a necessity which they must make a
virtue of while awaiting the hoped-for final struggle. And when they
theorize about the continuity of the struggles of to-day with the great
struggles of to-morrow, when they interpret their every-day activities
as part of a continuous social warfare, they are merely creating a
theory which in its turn justifies their practice and preserves their
revolutionary fire from extinction.
But theorizing does not essentially change the character of all
syndicalist activities. The Confederal Committee must attend to the
administrative and other questions, such as the questions of _viaticum_,
of the label, etc. The necessities of the syndical movement often lead
the members of the Confederal Committee into the antechambers of
Parliament or into the private rooms of the Ministers whose assistance
is solicited. The most revolutionary federations can not help entering
into negotiations with employers for the settlement of strikes. In
practice, therefore, the distinction between "revolutionary" and
"reformist" syndicalists is often obscured, because both act as they
must and not as they would.[227]
[227] This is admitted by both sides. See reports of last Congress held
at Toulouse (1910), p. 111.
This must not be interpreted to mean that there is any conscious
hypocrisy or undue personal interest on the part of the leaders of the
revolutionary syndicalists. On the contrary, the most bitter opponents
of the Confederation must admit that the reverse is true. "However one
may judge their propaganda," says M. Mermeix, "he is obliged to
acknowledge the disinterestedness of the libertarians who lead the
syndicalist movement. They do not work for money...."[228] There is also
no field in the Confederation for political ambition. Still the movement
has its demands which require suppleness and pliability on the part of
the leaders and which make impossible the rigid application of
principles.
[228] Terrail-Mermeix, _La Syndicalisme contre le Socialisme_ (Paris,
1907), p. 231.
On the other hand, the revolutionary syndicalists have in the syndicats
a tremendous force for their revolutionary ends. The close relation of
syndical life to all political and economic problems gives the
Confederal Committee the opportunity to participate in all questions of
interest. The high cost of living, the danger of a war, the legislative
policy of the government, troubles among the wine-growers, any public
question, indeed, is the occasion for the intervention of the Confederal
Committee. The latter appears, then, also as a revolutionary
organization which is always ready to criticise, to discredit and to
attack the government, and which is openly pursuing the overthrow of
existing institutions in France. And when one keeps in mind the
indefatigable anti-militaristic and anti-patriotic propaganda carried on
by the _Bourses du Travail_ all over the country, the revolutionary
character of the Confederation may be fully appreciated.
What is the future that may be predicted for the General Confederation
of Labor? Will the synthesis of revolutionism and of unionism that has
been achieved in it continue more or less stable until the "final"
triumph of the revolutionary syndicalists? Or will the latter be
overpowered by the "reformist" elements who will impress their ideas on
the Confederation and who will change the character of French
syndicalism?
These questions cannot at present be answered. The movement is so young
that no clear tendencies either way can be discerned. The two
possibilities, however, may be considered in connection with the
conditions that would be required to transform them into realities.
Those who predict a change in the character of French syndicalism
generally have the history of English Trades Unionism in mind. They
compare revolutionary syndicalism to the revolutionary period of English
Trades Unionism and think of the change that came about in the latter in
the third quarter of the past century. But the comparison is of little
value, because the conditions of France are different from those of
England, and because the international economic situation to-day is very
different from what it was fifty years ago.
It is probable that if the French syndicats should develop into large
and strong unions, highly centralized and provided with large
treasuries, other ideas and methods would prevail in the syndicalist
movement. But this change is dependent on a change in the economic life
of France. France must cease to be "the banker of Europe," must cease to
let other countries use its piled-up millions[229] for the development
of their natural resources and industry, and must devote itself to the
intensification of its own industrial activities. Such a change could
bring about greater productivity, higher wages, and a higher
concentration of the workingmen of the country. This change in
conditions of life might result in a modification of the psychology of
the French workingmen, though how rapid and how thorough-going such a
process could be is a matter of conjecture. But whether France will or
can follow the example of England or of Germany, in view of its natural
resources and of the situation of the international market, it does not
seem possible to say.[230] Besides, to change completely the character
of French syndicalism, it would be necessary to wipe out the political
history of France and its revolutionary traditions.
[229] It is estimated that France has about 40,000,000,000 francs
invested in foreign countries.
[230] See Preface to Second Edition.
On the other hand, the triumph of the revolutionary syndicalists
presupposes a total readjustment of groups and of interests. The
Confederation counts now about 600,000 members. Official statistics
count over 1,000,000 organized workingmen in France. But it must be
remembered that the federations underestimate their numbers for the
Confederation in order to pay less, while they exaggerate their numbers
for the _Annuaire Statistique_ in order to appear more formidable. The
Confederation, besides, for various reasons rejects a number of
organizations which desire to join it. It may be safe to say,
therefore, that the Confederation brings under its influence the greater
part of the organized workingmen of France.
But the total number of workingmen in France, according to the Census of
1906, is about 10,000,000, of which about 5,000,000 are employed in
industry and in transportation. The numbers of independent producers in
industry, commerce, and agriculture is about 9,000,000, of which about
2,000,000 are _petits patrons_. Over a million and a half persons are
engaged in the liberal professions and in the public services.[231]
[231] The active population in 1906 was over 20,000,000, out of a total
population of over 39,000,000. _Journal des Économistes_, Jan., 1911.
Among the latter the revolutionary syndicalists have met with success in
recent years. The ideas of revolutionary syndicalism have gained
adherents among the employees of the Post Office, Telegraph and
Telephone, and among the teachers of the public schools. The recent
Congresses of the teachers have declared themselves ready to collaborate
with the workingmen for the realization of their ideal society. The
following motion adopted by the recent Congress of Nantes, at which 500
delegates were present, is very characteristic: "The professional
associations of teachers (men and women), employees of the State, of the
Departments and of the Communes," reads the motion, "assembled in the
_Bourses du Travail_, declare their sympathy for the working-class,
declare that the best form of professional action is the syndical form;
express their will to work together with the workingmen's organizations
for the realization of the Social Republic."[232]
[232] _L'Humanité_, August 8, 1911.
Also among the industrial and commercial middle classes there are some
who look with favor on syndicalism. The French middle classes have for
the last quarter of a century tried to organize themselves for
resistance against the "financial feudalism" from which they suffer.
Several organizations have been formed among the small merchants and
masters, and in 1908 the "Association for the Defense of the Middle
Classes" was constituted. The president of this Association, M. Colrat,
wrote: "The ideas of the bourgeois syndicalism on the future are the
same as those of the workingmen's syndicalism.... Far from contradicting
one another, the syndicalism of the middle classes and the syndicalism
of the working-classes reinforce each other in many respects, and
notwithstanding many vexations, they lead to a state of relative
equilibrium by a certain equality of opposing forces."[233] In the
struggle against the big capitalists the leaders of the middle classes
appear to be ready to form an alliance with the working-class. There can
be little doubt, however, that the middle classes in general are opposed
to the revolutionary ideals of the syndicalists. To succeed, the
revolutionary syndicalists must bring about a change in the attitude of
these classes, for the history of France has shown that the fear of
"Communism" may throw the middle classes into the arms of a Caesar.
[233] M. Colrat, _Vers l'équilibre social_, quoted by Mr. J. L. Puecht,
"Le Mouvement des Classes Moyennes," in _La Grande Revue_, Dec., 1910.
Whatever possibility may become a reality, France seems destined to go
through a series of more or less serious struggles. Hampered by the
elements which hark back to the past and which have not yet lost all
importance, disorganized by the revolutionists who look forward to the
future for the realization of their ideal, the Republic of France is
still lacking the stability which could save her from upheavals and from
historical surprises. The highly centralized form of government and the
dominating position which Paris still holds in the life of France make
such surprises easier and more tempting than would otherwise be the
case. The process of social readjustment which is going on all over the
world at present, therefore, must lead in France to a more or less
catastrophic collision of the discordant elements which her political
and economic history have brought into existence.
The struggle has already begun. The government of the Republic is
determined to put an end to the revolutionary activities of the
syndicalists. It is urged on by all those who believe that only the
weakness of the Government has been the cause of the strength of the
Syndicalists. On the other hand, the Syndicalists are determined to
fight their battle to the end. What the outcome may be is hidden in the
mystery of the future. _Qui vivra--verra_.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
_Action Directe_. Revue Révolutionnaire Syndicaliste. Paris, July,
1903-August, 1904.
_Annuaire Statistique_. Ministère du Travail et de la Prévoyance
Sociale. Paris.
Antonelli, E. _La démocratie sociale devant les idées présentes_. Paris,
1911.
_Associations professionnelles ouvrières_; office du Travail. Paris,
1899-1904.
Barberet, J. _Monographies professionnelles_. 4 vols. Paris, 1886.
_Bataille Syndicaliste_. Daily.
Berth, Edouard. _Les nouveaux aspects du socialisme_. Paris, 1908.
Blum, Leon. _Les congrès ouvriers et socialistes français_. Paris, 1901.
Bouglé, E. _Syndicalisme et démocratie_. Paris, 1908.
Bourdeau, J. _Entre deux servitudes_. Paris, 1910.
Bourgin, H. _Le socialisme et la concentration industrielle_. Paris,
1911.
Boyle, James. _Minimum Wage and Syndicalism_. Cincinnati, 1913.
Bracq, J. Ch. _France under the Republic_. New York, 1910.
Brants, Victor. _La petite industrie contemporaine_. Paris, 1902.
Breton, J. L. _L'Unité Socialiste_. Vol. 7 of Histoire des partis
socialistes, ed. by Zévaès. Paris, 1912.
Brooks, John Graham. _American Syndicalism_. New York, 1913.
Buisson, Etienne. _La grève générale_. Paris, 1905.
Chaboseau, A. _De Babeuf à la Commune_. Volume 1 of Histoire des partis
socialistes, edited by Zévaès.
Challaye, Félicien. _Syndicalisme révolutionnaire et syndicalisme
réformiste_. Paris, 1909.
Chambre des Députés, Débats Parlementaires.
Charnay, Maurice. _Les Allemanistes_. Vol. 5 of Histoire des partis
socialistes, edited by Zévaès.
Clay, Sir Arthur. _Syndicalism and Labor_. London, 1912.
Cole, G. D. H. _The World of Labor_. London, 1913.
Commission Ouvrière de 1867, recueil des procés-verbaux. 2 vols. Paris,
1868-69.
Congrès national des syndicats ouvriers tenu à Lyon en Octobre, 1886,
compte rendu Lyon, 1887.
Congrès général des organisations socialistes, compte rendu. Paris,
1899.
Congrès (deuxième) général des organisations socialistes françaises tenu
à Paris de 28 au 30 Septembre, 1900, compte rendu. Paris, 1901.
Congrès (troisième) général des organisations socialistes françaises
tenu à Lyon du 26 au 28 mar., 1901, compte rendu. Paris, 1901.
Congrès national des syndicats tenu à Marseilles du 19 au 22 Octobre,
1892, compte rendu. Paris, 1909.
Congrès national du Parti Ouvrier tenu à Paris du 11 au 14 Juillet,
1897, compte rendu.
Congrès national corporatif (IV^e de la Confédération Générale du
Travail), tenu à Rennes, compte rendu. Rennes, 1898.
Congrès national corporatif (V^e de la Confédération), tenu à Paris,
compte rendu. Paris, 1900.
Congrès national corporatif (VI^e de la Confédération), tenu à Lyon,
compte rendu. Lyon, 1901.
Congrès national corporatif (VII^e de la Confédération), tenu à
Montpellier, compte rendu. Montpellier, 1902.
Congrès national corporatif (VIII^e de la Confédération), tenu à
Bourges, compte rendu. Bourges, 1904.
Congrès national corporatif (IX^e de la Confédération), tenu à Amiens,
compte rendu. Amiens, 1906.
Congrès national corporatif (X^e de la Confédération), tenu à Marseille,
compte rendu. Marseille, 1909.
Congrès national corporatif (XI^e de la Confédération), tenu à Toulouse,
compte rendu. Paris, 1911.
Congrès national corporatif (XII^e de la Confédération), tenu à Havre,
compte rendu. Paris, 1913.
Congrès socialiste international tenu à Paris du 23 au 27 septembre,
1900. Paris, 1901.
Connay, J. _Le Compagnonnage, son histoire, ses mystères_. Paris, 1909.
Cornélissen, Ch. "Ueber den internationalen Syndikalismus." _Archiv für
Sozialwissenschaft und Sozialpolitik_. Tübingen, 1910.
Crouzel, A. _Étude historique, économique et juridique sur les
coalitions et les grèves_. Paris, 1887.
Da Costa, Charles. _Les Blanquistes_. Vol. 6 of Histoire des partis
socialistes, edited by Zévaès. Paris, 1912.
Delesalle, J. _Les Bourses du Travail et la C. G. T._ Paris.
Delesalle, P. _L'action syndicaliste et les anarchistes_. Paris, 1900.
Déville, G. _Principes socialistes_. Paris, 1896.
Dijol, M. _Situation économique de la France, sous le régime
protectioniste de 1892_. Paris, 1911.
Diligent, Victor. _Les orientations syndicales_. Paris, 1910.
Dru, Gaston. _La Révolution qui vient_. Paris.
Dubois, F. _The Anarchist Peril_. Tr. by Ralph Derechef. London.
Dubreilh, L. _La Commune_. Paris, 1908.
Du-Cellier, M. _Histoire des classes laborieuses en France_. Paris,
1860.
Dufour. _Le Syndicalisme et la Prochaine Révolution_. Paris, 1913.
_Économiste Français_. Monthly.
_Égalité_. Periodical published from 1877 to 1881. Paris.
Ely, R. T. _French and German Socialism_. New York, 1898.
Estey, James Arthur. _Revolutionary Syndicalism_. London, 1913.
Faguet, E. _Le socialisme en 1907_. Paris, 1907.
Festy, Octave. _Le mouvement ouvrier au debut de la Monarchie de
Juillet_. Paris.
_Forces productives de la France_. Conferences organisées a la Société
des anciens élèves de l'École libre des Sciences politiques. Paris,
1909.
Franck, Charles. _Les Bourses du Travail et la Confédération Générale du
Travail_. Paris, 1910.
Fribourg, E. E. _L'Association internationale des travailleurs_. Paris,
1871.
Garin, J. _L'anarchie et les anarchistes_. Paris. 1885.
Georgi, E. _Theorie und Praxis des Generalstreiks in der modernen
Arbeiterbewegung_. Jena, 1908.
_Grande Revue_. Monthly.
Griffuelhes, V. _Voyage révolutionnaire; impressions d'un
propagandiste_. Paris, 1910.
Griffuelhes, V. _L'action syndicaliste_. Paris, 1908.
Griffuelhes, V. et Niel, L. _Les objectifs de nos luttes de classes_.
Paris, 1909.
_Guerre Sociale, La_, revolutionary weekly edited by Gustave Hervé.
Guesde, J. _Le Socialisme au jour le jour_. Paris, 1899.
Guesde, J. et Lafargue, P. _Le programme du parti ouvrier_. Paris, 1897.
4th edition.
Guillaume, James. _L'Internationale, documents et souvenirs_. 4 vols.
Paris, 1905-10.
Hamon. A. _Le Socialisme et le congrès de Londres_. Paris, 1897.
Hanoteaux, G. _Modern France_. 4 vols. New York, 1903-09.
Harley, J. H. _Syndicalism_. London, 1912.
Hervé, Gustave. _My Country, Right or Wrong_. English translation by Guy
Bowman. London, 1911.
Hubert-Valleroux, P. _La Co-opération en France_. Paris, 1904.
Humbert, Sylvain. _Le Mouvement Syndical_. Vol. 9 of Histoire des partis
socialistes, edited by Zévaès. Paris, 1912.
Humbert, Sylvain. _Les Possibilistes_. Vol. 4 of Histoire des partis
socialistes, edited by Zévaès. Paris, 1911.
_L'Humanité_. Socialist daily published since 1905. Contains many
articles by revolutionary and reformist syndicalists.
Isambert, G. _Les idées socialistes en France de 1815 à 1848_. Paris,
1905.
Jouhaux, L. _Le Syndicalisme français_. Bruxelles, 1911.
_Journal des Débats_. Weekly.
_Journal des Économistes_. Monthly.
Kirkup, Th. _A History of Socialism_. Third edition. New York, 1906.
Kritsky. _L'Évolution du syndicalisme en France_. Paris, 1908.
Labusquière. _La Troisième République_. Paris, 1909.
Lagardelle, H. _L'Évolution des syndicats ouvriers en France_. Paris,
1901.
Lagardelle, H. _La grève générale et le socialisme_. Paris, 1905.
Lagardelle, H. _Le socialisme ouvrier_. Paris, 1911.
Lagardelle, H. "Die Syndikalistische Bewegung in Frankreich." _Archiv
für Sozialwissenschaft und Sozialpolitik_. Tübingen, 1908.
Laurin, M. T. _Les Instituteurs et le syndicalisme_. Paris, 1908.
Lavy, A. _L'Oeuvre de Millerand_. Paris, 1902.
Leroy, Maxime. _Syndicats et Services Publics_. Paris, 1909.
Levasseur, E. _Histoire des classes ouvrières et d'industrie en France
avant 1789_. 2 vols. Second edition. Paris, 1900.
Levasseur, E. _Histoire des classes ouvrières et d'industrie en France
de 1789 à 1870_. 2 vols. Second edition. Paris, 1903.
Levine, Louis. "The Development of Syndicalism in America." _Political
Science Quarterly_, September, 1913.
Levine, Louis. "Direct Action." _Forum_. New York, May, 1912.
Levine, Louis. "Syndicalism." _North American Review_. July, 1912.
Levine, Louis. "The Standpoint of Syndicalism." _Annals of the American
Academy of Political and Social Science_. 1912.
Lewis, Arthur D. _Syndicalism and the General Strike_. London, 1912.
_Libertaire, Le_. Anarchist weekly.
Lorulot, André. _Le Syndicalisme et la transformation sociale_. Arcueil,
1909.
Louis, Paul. _Histoire du socialisme français_. Paris, 1901.
Louis, P. _Histoire du mouvement syndical en France_. Paris, 1907.
Louis, P. _Le syndicalisme contre l'état_. Paris, 1910.
Louis, P. "Die Einheitsbestrebungen im französischen Sozialismus."
_Archiv für Sozialwissenschaft und Sozialpolitik_. Tübingen, 1909.
Macdonald, J. Ramsay. _Syndicalism_. 1912.
Méline, J. _The Return to the Land_. Tr. from the French. New York,
1907.
Milhaud, A. _La lutte des classes à travers l'histoire et la politique_.
Paris.
Millerand, A. _Le socialisme réformiste français_. Paris, 1903.
Molinari, G. _Les Bourses du Travail_. Paris, 1893.
Molinari, G. _Le mouvement socialiste et les réunions publiques_. Paris,
1872.
_Mouvement Socialiste_. Published since 1899. Particularly valuable for
students of revolutionary syndicalism.
Orry, Albert. _Les Socialistes Indépendant_. Vol. 8 of Histoire des
partis socialistes, edited by Zévaès. Paris, 1911.
Parti Socialiste. Proceedings of annual conventions (1904-1913).
Pataud, E. et Pouget, E. _Comment nous ferons la révolution_. Paris,
1909. Translated into English by Charlotte and Frederick Charles, under
title: _Syndicalism and the Co-operative Commonwealth_. London, 1913.
Pawlowski, A. _La confédération générale du travail_. Paris, 1910.
Pelloutier, F. _Le congrès général du parti socialiste français_. Paris,
1900.
Pelloutier, F. _Histoire des bourses du travail_. Paris, 1902.
Pelloutier, Maurice. _Fernand Pelloutier, sa vie, son oeuvre_. Paris,
1911.
Pelloutier, F. et M. _La vie ouvrière_. Paris, 1900.
Perdiguier, Agricol. _Le livre du compagnonnage_. Second edition. Paris,
1841.
Pierrot. _Syndicalism et révolution_. Second edition. Paris, 1908.
Pouget, E. _Le sabotage_. Paris, 1910. English translation by Arturo M.
Giovannitti.
Pouget, E. _Les bases du syndicalisme_. Paris.
Pouget, S. _Le syndicat_. Paris.
Pouget, E. _Le parti du travail_. Paris.
Pouget, E. _La confédération générale du travail_. Paris, 1908.
Prolo, Jacques. _Les Anarchistes_. Vol. 10 of Histoire des partis
socialistes, edited by Zévaès. Paris, 1912.
Proudhon, J. P. _De la capacité politique des classes ouvrières_. Paris,
1865.
Renard, Georges. _La république de 1848_. Paris, 1907.
Renard, G. _Syndicats, trades unions, et corporations_. Paris, 1909.
Rénault, Ch. _Histoire des grèves_. Paris, 1887.
_Revue Socialiste_. Monthly.
_Revue Syndicaliste_. Monthly published from May, 1905, to January,
1910.
Séances du Congrès Ouvrier de France. Session de 1876. Paris, 1877.
Seilhac, Leon de. _Syndicats ouvriers, fédérations, bourses du travail_.
Paris, 1902.
Seilhac, Leon de. _Les congrès ouvriers en France_. Paris, 1899.
Seilhac, Leon de. _Le monde socialiste_. Paris, 1896.
Severac, G. _Guide pratique des syndicats professionnels_. Paris, 1908.
Smith, L. _Les coalitions et les grèves_. Paris, 1885.
_Socialiste, Le_. Organe central du Parti Socialiste Français.
Sombart, Werner. _Socialism and the Social Movement_. English tr. by M.
Epstein. New York, 1909.
Sorel, G. _L'avenir socialiste des syndicats_. Revised edition. Paris,
1901.
Sorel, G. _La décomposition du marxisme_. Paris, 1908.
Sorel, G. _Illusions du progrès_. Paris, 1911. Second edition.
Sorel, G. _Réflexions sur la violence_. Paris, 1910. Second edition.
Sorel, G. _Introduction à l'économie moderne_. Second edition. Paris.
Sorel, G. _La révolution dreyfusienne_. Second edition. Paris, 1911.
Sorel, G. "La polémique pour l'interprétation du marxisme." _Revue
internationale de sociologie_. Paris, 1900.
Sorel, G. "L'éthique du socialisme." _Morale Sociale_. Paris, 1900.
Spargo, John. _Syndicalism, Industrial Unionism, and Socialism_. New
York, 1913.
Stoddart, J. T. _The New Socialism_. London, 1910.
St. Leon, E. Martin. _Le compagnnonnage_. Paris, 1901.
_Syndicalisme et socialisme_. Paris, 1908.
Syndicat et syndicalisme; opinions par Griffuelhes, Yvetot, Pouget, etc.
Paris.
Terrail-Mermeix. _La France socialiste_. Paris, 1886.
Terrail-Mermeix. _Le syndicalisme contre le socialisme_. Paris, 1907.
_Terrassier, Le_. Published bi-weekly by some syndicats of the
building-trades.
_Temps Nouveaux_. Anarchist weekly.
Thomas, Albert. _Le second empire_. Paris, 1907.
Tridon, André. _The New Unionism_. New York, 1913.
_Vie Ouvrière_. Revue Syndicaliste Bi-mensuelle. Paris.
Villetard, Edmond. _History of the International_. Tr. from the French,
1874.
_Voix du Peuple_. Organe de la Confédération Générale du Travail.
Warbasse, James Peter. _The Ethics of Sabotage_. Pamphlet. New York,
1913.
Ware, Fabian. _The Worker and his Country_. London, 1912.
Warin, Robert. _Les Syndicats Jaunes_. Paris, 1908.
Webb, Sydney and Beatrice. _An Examination of Syndicalism_. London,
1912.
Webb, B. and S. _History of Trade Unionism_.
Weill, George. _Histoire du mouvement social en France_. First edition,
1904. Second edition, 1910.
Weill, G. "Die Formen der Arbeiterbewegung in Frankreich." _Archiv für
Sozialwissenschaft und Sozialpolitik_. Tübingen, 1909.
Yvetot, George. _A. B. C. syndicaliste_. Paris.
Yvetot, G. _Manuel du soldat_. Paris.
Zévaès, Alexandre. _Histoire des partis socialistes en France_. 11
volumes. Paris, 1911.
Zévaès, Alexandre. _Le Socialisme en France depuis 1871_. Paris, 1908.
Zévaès, Alexandre. _Le Syndicalisme Contemporain_. Paris, 1911.
Zévaès, Alexandre. _Le Socialisme en 1912_. Vol. 11 of Histoire des
partis socialistes. Paris, 1912.
Zévaès, Alexandre. _De la semaine sanglante au Congrès de Marseille
(1871-1879)_. Vol. 2 of Histoire des partis socialistes, edited by
Zévaès. Paris, 1911.
Zévaès, Alexandre. _Les Guesdistes_. Vol. 3 of Histoire des partis
socialistes. Paris, 1911.
[Transcriber's note:
List of corrected printers' errors:
pages 14, 15, 48, 132, 145, 183 and 189 "working class" changed to
"working-class"
Page 5 "devolpment" changed to "development" ("it is also a development
of the French Labor Movement.")
page 13 "coöperative" changed to "co-operative" ("Revolution of 1848 and
the co-operative movement") and ("Failure of co-operative central bank in
1868")
page 13 "coöperation" changed to "co-operation" ("--Syndicats and
co-operation--")
page 16 -- added ("French workingmen--Causes of the")
page 30 "Perdigiuer" changed to "Perdiguier" ("Agricol Perdiguier, _Le
Livre du Compagnonnage_, 1841.")
page 32 "resistance" change to "résistance" ("was the _société de
résistance_")
Page 32 "." replaced with "," ("_Les Associations Professionelles_, vol.
i. pp. 201-203.")
page 35 "presecuted" changed to "persecuted" ("organizations were
persecuted;")
page 40 "Cöopération" changed to "Co-opération" ("_La Co-opération_
(Paris, 1904)")
page 51 "bourgois" changed to "bourgeois" ("separation which existed
between bourgeois and workingmen")
page 52 footnote reference altered, referred to wrong footnote
page 56 "hemmoroids" changed to "hemorrhoids" ("which it leaves to the
hemorrhoids of bourgeois of every stamp")
page 62 "Counseil" changed to "Conseil" ("(the _Conseil fédéral
national_)")
page 65 "Arbeiter-bewegung" changed to "Arbeiterbewegung" ("_Theorie und
Praxis des Generalstreiks in der modernen Arbeiterbewegung_")
page 68 missing "not" added ("they argued that the general strike could
not be successful")
page 71 "employes" changed to "employees" ("of workingmen and of
employees of both sexes")
page 71 missing " added ("(_Parti syndical politicien_)."")
page 75 missing "(" added ("_Bourses du Travail_ (1896)")
page 80 "Nouveoux" changed to "Nouveaux" ("_Temps Nouveaux_, 23 Mars,
1901.")
page 93 "Alemanists" changed to "Allemanists" ("defended by Allemanists
and anarchists,")
page 93 "Guerard" changed to "Guérard" ("M. Guérard who defended the
idea before the Congress. Said M. Guérard:")
page 94 "Guerard" changed to "Guérard" ("And M. Guérard, applauded by
the audience,")
page 96 "recomended" changed to "recommended" ("To this end the report
recommended")
page 97 "sub-committes" changed to "sub-committees" ("Only twenty
Bourses formed sub-committees.")
page 98 "Congès" changed to "Congrès" ("_X Congrès National
Corporatif_")
page 101 removed " ("the completest possible emancipation.")
page 103 "posesses" changed to "possess" ("the workingmen who
possess nothing.")
page 104 "Guerard" changed to "Guérard" ("The secretary of the
Confederation, M. Guérard,")
page 104 , removed "," from "complained that the _Voix du Peuple_"
page 109 "bourgeoise" changed to "bourgeoisie" ("alliance of the
bourgeoisie and of the working-class")
page 111 footnote reference altered, referred to wrong footnote
page 113 removed " ("stop the offensive movement of the workingmen.")
page 114 missing " added (""independently of all parliamentarism"")
page 116 "Parlémentaires" changed to "Parlementaires" ("_Chambre des
Deputés, Débats Parlementaires_")
page 117 "Francais" changed to "Français" ("_Parti Socialiste
Français_")
page 117 "Jaures" changed to "Jaurès" ("and J. Jaurès outlined a plan
according")
page 126 "," replaced with "." ("the strike, the boycott, the label, and
_sabotage_.")
page 127 missing "." added ("It is a revolutionary fact of great
value.")
page 129 "merchchandise" change to "merchandise" ("and of perishable
merchandise.")
page 130 missing " added to end of phrase ("source of intrigues and of
"wire-pulling."")
page 135 "counterbalance" changed to "counter-balance" ("will
counter-balance the centralizing tendencies")
page 137 "particulary" changed to "particularly" ("Moreover, the
syndicats, particularly")
page 137 "train" changed to "trains" ("The very struggle which the
syndicats carry on trains the workingmen")
page 138 "workinmen" changed to "workingmen" ("The mass of workingmen")
page 138 "massess" changed to "masses" ("keep the masses as quiet,")
page 154 "Jaures" changed to "Jaurès" ("by M. Jaurès "the metaphysician
of revolutionary syndicalism,"")
page 155 "Movement" changed to "Mouvement" ("_Mouvement Socialiste_")
page 155 "Sozialwissenchaft" changed to "Sozialwissenschaft" ("_Archiv
für Sozialwissenschaft und Sozialpolitik_")
page 156 "Les" changed "Le" ("_Le Mouvement Socialiste_ (May, 1908),
p. 390.")
page 157 "Jaures" changed to "Jaurès" ("just as Kropotkin, Jaurès,
Proudhon")
page 158 "Guerard" changed to "Guérard" ("General Confederation of
Labor, M. Guérard, wrote,")
page 159 "approfundir" changed to "approfondir" ("his life in the
deepening (_approfondir_)")
page 164 "," replaced with "." ("relations between the adhering
federations.")
page 164 "it" replaced with "its" ("This section appoints its own
secretary,")
page 169 "idemnity" changed to "indemnity" ("employment bureaus with
indemnity in 1901-2.")
page 170 "Economistes" changed to "Économistes" ("_Journal des
Économistes_")
page 172 "Guerard" changed to "Guérard"("and by M. Guérard, the delegate
of the railway workers.")
page 177 "Debats" changed to "Débats" ("_Journal des Débats_ (27 April,
1906), p. 769.")
page 181 "economie" changed to "economic" ("it was an instrument in
economic struggles")
page 182 "coöperation" changed to "co-operation" ("a co-operation of
various political elements.")
page 187 "," replaced with "." ("of the government. The reports of the")
page 190 "Offie" changed to "Office" ("employees grievances of the Post
Office employees")
page 190 missing " added (""revolutionaries"")
page 191 "coöperation" changed to "co-operation" ("soliciting the
co-operation of the government.")
page 196 extra "the" removed ("the passage of the three years'")
page 200 missing " added ("" ... but particularly divergence of aims."")
page 200 "sydicalists" changed to "syndicalists" ("The third group of
revolutionary syndicalists")
page 203 "Vivani" changed to "Viviani" ("(_e. g._, Millerand, Viviani,
Briand)")
page 209 "Economistes" changed to "Économistes" ("_Journal des
Économistes_")
page 211 extra "and" removed ("the strikers at home and creates")
page 211 "yeas" changed to "years" ("in recent years")
page 211 "Fèdèration" changed to "Fédération" ("_Fédération du Livre_")
page 214 "sytematized" changed to "systematized" ("the principles
systematized,")
page 224 "Etude" changed to "Étude" ("_Étude historique, économique et
juridique sur les coalitions et les grèves_")
page 225 "Ecole" changed to "École" ("Conferences organisées a la
Société des anciens élèves de l'École libre des Sciences politiques.")
page 226 "Evolution" changed to "Évolution" ("Kritsky. _L'Évolution du
syndicalisme en France_.")
page 226 "," replaced with "." ("Louis, Paul.")]