CHAPTER IV.

Socialism, Theoretic and Practical—Statements of the

Leaders—Vengeance on the “Spitzels”—The Black Flag in the

Streets—Resolutions in the _Alarm_—The Board of Trade

Procession—Why it Failed—Experts on Anarchy—Parsons, Spies, Schwab

and Fielden Outline their Belief—The International Platform—Why

Communism Must Fail—A French Experiment and its Lesson—The Law of

Averages—Extracts from the Anarchic Press—Preaching Murder—Dynamite

or the Ballot-Box?—“The Reaction in America”—Plans for Street

Fighting—Riot Drill and Tactics—Bakounine and the Social

Revolution—Twenty-one Statements of an Anarchist’s Duty—Herways’

Formula—Predicting the Haymarket—The Lehr und Wehr Verein and the

Supreme Court—The White Terror and the Red—Reinsdorf, the Father

of Anarchy—His Association with Hoedel and Nobiling—Attempt to

Assassinate the German Emperor—Reinsdorf at Berlin—His Desperate

Plan—“Old Lehmann” and the Socialist’s Dagger—The Germania

Monument—An Attempt to Kill the Whole Court—A Culvert Full of

Dynamite—A Wet Fuse and no Explosion—Reinsdorf Condemned to

Death—His Last Letters—Chicago Students of his Teachings—De

Tocqueville and Socialism.

THE Constitution of the United States guarantees the right of free

speech, free discussion and free assemblage. These are the cardinal

doctrines of our free institutions. But when liberty is trenched upon

to the extent of advocacy of revolutionary methods, subversion of law

and order and the displacement of existing society, Socialism places

itself beyond the pale of moral forces and arrays itself on the side

of the freebooter, the bandit, the cut-throat and the traitor. Public

measures and public men are open to the widest criticism consistent

with truth, decency and justice, but differences of opinion are no

more to be brought into harmony through blood than the settlement

of private disputes is to be effected by means of the bludgeon, the

knife or the bullet. The freedom of speech which is valuable either to

the individual or to humanity is that which builds up, not destroys,

society.

Now, what does Socialism, or Anarchy, precisely teach, and at what

does it aim? It is true, there are two schools of Socialism—one

conservative and the other radical to a sanguinary degree; one seeking

a change in existing society and government through enlightenment,

and the other the attainment of the same principles through force.

But the conservatives form so small a portion of the Socialistic body

that they cut no figure in the general direction and management of the

organization; and so far as relates to the visible manifestations of

that body, Socialism in the United States may be regarded as synonymous

with Anarchy.

As I have shown, the ostensible object of the organization in Chicago,

as elsewhere, at the outset, was peaceful, but the ulterior aim—the

establishment of Socialism through force, when sufficiently powerful

in numbers—has in later years clearly developed. The early Socialist

orators only hinted at force as a possible factor in the social

revolution they advocated, and it was reserved for the active agitators

of the past ten years to boldly and openly proclaim for the methods of

the Paris Commune.

Before proceeding to particulars as to the utterances of Anarchist

leaders, the sources of their inspiration and their definition of

Socialism, it may be well to advert to some incidents in connection

with their movements as a revolutionary party. One incident specially

worthy of mention was a meeting held at Mueller’s Hall, corner of

Sedgwick Street and North Avenue, on the evening of January 12, 1885.

It was a secret gathering, but, despite Socialistic vigilance, Officer

Michael Hoffman managed to remain and quietly note the drift of the

speeches. Parsons first took the floor, and said:

[Illustration: THE BLACK FLAG. From a Photograph.]

Gentlemen, before we call this meeting to order, I want you to be sure

that we are all right and all one. I want you to see if there are any

reporters or policemen present. See if you can discover any spies.

If you find any one here, you can do with him as you please, but my

advice to you is, take him and strangle him and then throw him out of

the window; then let the people think that the fellow fell out. And if

you should give one of them a chance for his life, tell him, if he has

any more notions to come to our meetings, he should first go to St.

Michael’s Church, see the priest and prepare himself for death, say

farewell to all his friends and family—and then let him enter. I want

all these people to know that I am not afraid of them; I don’t like

them, and let them stay away from me.

After precautions had been taken to exclude objectionable persons, the

proceedings began. Four speeches were delivered, two in English and two

in German. Parsons confined his remarks to the capitalists. All present

were poor, he said, and they only had themselves to blame. One-half

of all the wealth in the country belonged to the poor people, but the

capitalists had robbed them of it. The poor offered no resistance,

and yet the capitalist was doing the same thing day after day. He was

getting richer, and the poor poorer, because the working people lay

down and permitted themselves to be robbed. He recounted some of Most’s

experiences, and insisted that capitalists must submit to workingmen.

They must be shown that their lives are worth no more than the lives of

the working people.

[Illustration: THE OFFICE OF THE ARBEITER-ZEITUNG.

From a Photograph.]

He next touched upon the merits of a new invention by which, he said,

many hundreds of houses could be set on fire, and exhibited a small

tin box or can with a capacity of four ounces. This can, he remarked,

could be filled with some chemical stuff to serve as an explosive. A

great many of these cans could be carried in a basket, and, traveling

around as match peddlers or under some other guise, his hearers could

secure entrance to the houses of capitalists. All they would then be

obliged to do was to either place or drop one of “those darlings” in a

secure place and go about their business. It would do its work, without

any one’s presence to attend to it, in less time than an hour. If they

would get the boxes ready, he would tell them where to get the “stuff.”

This plan of operations would keep the fire and police departments

quite busy. If they organized and went to work with a resolute spirit,

they could have things all their own way throughout the city and obtain

possession of what remained after their work of destruction. He also

urged all his comrades to become familiar with dynamite and said that

for the necessary instructions they could come to a building on Fifth

Avenue (107, the offices of the _Arbeiter-Zeitung_ and _Alarm_), where

he and others could be found to help them. There was no other way now

left, he continued, except for the laborers to use the sword, the

bullet and dynamite, and, closing sententiously, he said:

I probably will be hung as soon as I get out on the street, but if

they do hang me, boys, don’t forget what I have been telling you about

the little can and the dear stuff, dynamite, because this is the only

way I and you can get our rights.

It goes without saying that Parsons was applauded to the echo. Another

speaker emphasized his remarks about dynamite, but refrained from

making a speech, because, as he said, Parsons had “covered the ground

so well and thoroughly.” One of the German speakers gave his attention

to King William and the Pope, scoring them in the strongest language he

could command. He held that the “police of Chicago were only kept to

protect the property of capitalists and to club poor workingmen.”

Another event memorable in the history of the party was the flaunting

of the black flag on the streets of Chicago for the first time. On that

occasion—November 25, 1884, Thanksgiving Day—they marched through the

fashionable thoroughfares of the South and North Divisions, and, with

two women as standard-bearers for the black and the red, they made it

a point to halt before the residences of the wealthy, uttering groans

and using threatening language. Their route included Dearborn Street to

Maple on the North Side. There they massed in front of the residence of

Hon. E. B. Washburne, ex-Minister to France. They pulled the door-bell

and insulted the family by indulging in all sorts of noises, groans

and cat-calls. They rested satisfied with this last exhibition, and

retraced their steps, proceeding to Market Square, where they dispersed.

The preliminaries leading up to the procession just described were thus

given in the _Alarm_ on the following Saturday:

THE BLACK FLAG.

_The Emblem of Hunger Unfolded by the Proletarians of Chicago.—The

Red Flag Borne Aloft by Thousands of Workingmen on Thanksgiving

Day.—The Poverty of the Poor is Created by the Robbery of the

Rich.—Speeches, Resolutions and a Grand Demonstration of the

Unemployed, the Tramps and Miserables of the City.—Significant

Incidents._

Shortly before Thanksgiving Day some of the working people, after

consultation, issued the following circular to wage-workers and tramps:

The Governor has ordained next Thursday for Thanksgiving. You are to

give thanks because your masters refuse you employment; because you

are hungry and without home or shelter, and your masters have taken

away what you have created, and arranged to shoot you by the police or

militia if you refuse to die in your hovels, in due observation of Law

and Order. You must give thanks that you face the blizzards without

an overcoat; without fit shoes and clothes, while abundant clothing

made by you spoils in the storehouses; that you suffer hunger while

millions of bushels of grain rots in the elevators. For this purpose a

thanksgiving meeting will be held on Market Square at 2:30 o’clock, to

be followed by a demonstration to express our thanks to our “Christian

brothers on Michigan Avenue.” Every one that feels the mockery of this

Thanksgiving order should be present. Signed, the Committee of the

Grateful Workingpeople’s International Association.

Thursday opened with sleet and rain, cold and miserable. At 2:30 over

three thousand people assembled on Market Street, under the unpitying

rain and sleet. A stranger said, “What you want is guns; you don’t want

to be heard talking.” He was stopped for the regular arrangements.

The meeting being called to order, A. R. Parsons said: “We assemble

as representatives of the disinherited, to speak in the name of forty

thousand unemployed workingmen of Chicago—two millions in the United

States and fifteen millions in the civilized world.” He compared the

Thanksgiving feast to that of Belshazzar, and said the champagne wrung

from the blood of the poor ought to strangle the rich. He then read as

follows: “St. James, chapter 5, says, ‘Go to now, ye rich men, weep

and howl for your miseries which are to come upon you. Your riches

are corrupted, and your garments are moth-eaten. Your gold and silver

is cankered; and the rust of them shall be a witness against you, and

shall eat your flesh as it were fire. Ye have heaped treasures together

for the last days.

[Illustration: AN ANARCHIST PROCESSION.]

Behold, the hire of the laborers who have reaped down your fields,

which ye have kept back by fraud, crieth: ‘Woe to them that bring about

iniquity by law.’ The prophet Habakkuk says: ‘Woe to him that buildeth

a town by blood, and establisheth a city by iniquity.’ The prophet Amos

says: ‘Hear this, O ye that swallow up the needy, even to make the poor

to fail from the land, that I may buy the poor for silver, and the

needy for a pair of shoes.’ The prophet Isaiah says: ‘Woe unto them

that chain house to house, and lay field to field, till there is no

place, that they may be alone in the midst of the earth.’ Solomon says:

‘There is a generation that are pure in their own eyes, and yet is not

washed of their filthiness; a generation, O, how lifted are their eyes,

and how their eyelids are lifted up: A generation whose teeth are as

swords, and their jaw-teeth as knives, to devour the poor from off the

earth, and the needy from among men.’”

And, concluding, he said: “We did not intend to wait for a future

existence, but to do something for ourselves in this.”

He introduced S. S. Griffin, who said this was an international

assembly in the interests of humanity, having no quarrel with each

other and objecting to being set at work by governmental scheme. “Don’t

believe that any government or system should be allowed to pit man

against man, for any cause; and to get at the root of these evils, we

must go to the foundation of property rights and the wage system. The

old system could not meet the demands of our present civilization. The

present cry is against over-production, because it operates against

humanity. Over-production, glutting the market, causes a lock-out,

depriving the wage class of the means of purchasing. Vacant houses

stop the building industry, and result in throwing builders out of

employment. Ragged because of a surplus of clothing; homeless because

of too many houses; hungry because there is too much bread; freezing

because too much coal is produced. The system must be changed. Man can

wear but one suit of clothes at a time and can consume only about so

much. The genius of our age is inventing and increasing the productive

power. A system that in effect tells the working classes that, the more

they produce, the less they will have to enjoy, is a check on human

progress and cannot continue. Everything must be made free. No man

should control what he has no personal use for.”

Upon Mr. Parsons’ call the resolutions were read, as follows:

WHEREAS, We have outlived wage and property system; and whereas, the

right of property requires more effort to adjust it between man and

man than to produce and distribute it:

_Resolved_, That property rights should no longer be maintained or

respected, and that all useless workers should be deprived of useless

employment and required to engage in productive industry; and as this

is impossible under the payment system,

_Resolved_, That no man shall pay for anything, or receive pay for

anything, or deprive himself of what he may desire, that he finds out

of use or vacant.

_Resolved_, That whoever refuses to devote a reasonable amount of

energy to the production or distribution of necessaries is the enemy

of mankind and ought to be so treated; and so of the willful waster.

As this system cannot be introduced as against existing ignorance and

selfishness without force, _Resolved_, That, when introduced, the good

of mankind and the saving of blood requires that forcible opposition

shall be dealt with summarily; but that no one should be harmed for

holding opposite opinions.

_Resolved_, That our policy is wise, humane and practical and ought to

be enforced at the earliest possible moment.

As an expression of thankfulness, _Resolved_, That we are thankful we

have learned the true cause of poverty and the remedies, and can only

be more thankful when the remedy is applied.

The next speaker was Samuel Fielden. He denounced the hypocrisy of

calling upon people to thank God for prosperity, while providing no

changes for the better, when so many people were in actual want in

the midst of abundance. When he was a boy, his mother had taught

him to say, “Our Father who art in Heaven,” but so far as he knew,

God remained there and would not come here until things were better

arranged. “Our motto is, Liberty, Equality and Fraternity, embracing

all men. Our international movement is to unite all countries and to do

away with the robber class.”

August Spies spoke. Pointing to the black flag, he said it was the

first time the emblem of hunger and starvation had been unfurled on

American soil. He said we had got to strike down these robbers who were

robbing the working people.

In answer to a call from the Germans, Mr. Schwab spoke in German a few

minutes. A stranger said: “Get your guns out and go for them. That

is all I have got to say.” Three cheers were given for the social

revolution. The audience then formed a procession three thousand strong.

[Illustration: THE BOARD OF TRADE.

From a Photograph.]

Another notable procession was on the evening of the opening of the

new Board of Trade building. The Anarchists gathered in front of the

_Arbeiter-Zeitung_ office and were addressed by Parsons and Fielden.

The speeches were highly inflammatory. Parsons insisted that they

ought to blow up the institution, and urged them to arm themselves

“to meet their oppressors with weapons.” The Board of Trade, he said,

was a robbers’ roost, and they were reveling on the proceeds of the

workingmen. “How many,” he asked, “of my hearers could give twenty

dollars for a supper to-night? We will never gain anything by arguments

and words. While those men are enjoying a sumptuous supper, workingmen

are starving.” He characterized the police as bloodhounds and servants

of the robbing capitalists, and suggested that the mob loot Marshall

Field’s dry-goods store and other places and secure such things as they

needed. It was apparent that these sentiments appealed strongly to the

inclinations of the assembled rabble, and when Parsons had concluded

the mob was ready for an even more violent harangue.

Fielden went as far as to urge the mob to follow him and rob those

places, and, like Parsons, held that the Board of Trade building had

been built out of money of which they had been robbed, and that all who

transacted business in that place were “robbers, and thieves, and ought

to be killed.”

There were hundreds of tramps in the throng addressed, and naturally

all allusions to capitalists as robbers, and all suggestions to

plunder, were greeted with applause. A procession was formed, with

Oscar W. Neebe, Parsons and Fielden at the head, and with two women

following next carrying the red and black flags. They marched down

to the Board of Trade, but, arriving at the street leading to the

building, a company of police headed them off. Thus balked, they had

to content themselves with marching through the streets back to their

starting-point, where they separated without further exhibition of

violence than subsequently hurling a stone through the window of a

carriage occupied by a prominent West Side resident and his wife,

whom they took to be a millionaire on his way to the Board of Trade

reception. A tougher-looking lot of men than those who composed the

procession it would be difficult to find, and, once started in the

direction of violence at the building, there is no telling the extent

of damage they might have inflicted. The toleration of such a parade

by the municipal authorities was severely criticised by the community,

for, had it not been for the action of the late Col. Welter, then

Inspector of Police, in intercepting the procession, a serious riot

would have occurred.

Parsons, when asked subsequently why they had not blown up the Board

of Trade building, replied that they had not looked for police

interference and were not prepared. “The next time,” he said, “we will

be prepared to meet them with bombs and dynamite.” Fielden reiterated

the same sentiments and expressed the opinion that in the course of a

year they might be ready for the police.

* * * * *

NOW WHAT is the Socialism or Anarchy they seek to establish? In his

speech before Judge Gary in the Criminal Court, when asked why sentence

of death should not be imposed upon him, Anarchist Parsons, among other

things, thus described the condition of affairs when Socialism should

obtain sway:

Anarchy is a free society where there is no concentrated or

centralized power, no state, no king, no emperor, no ruler, no

president, no magistrate, no potentate of any character whatever. Law

is the enslaving power of men. Blackstone defines the law to be a rule

of action, prescribing what is right and prohibiting what is wrong.

Now, very true. Anarchists hold that it is wrong for one person to

prescribe what is the right action for another person, and then compel

that person to obey that rule. Therefore, right action consists in

each person attending to his business, and allowing everybody else to

do likewise. Whoever prescribes a rule of action for another to obey

is a tyrant, a usurper and an enemy of liberty. This is precisely

what every statute does. Anarchy is the natural law, instead of the

man-made statute, and gives men leaders in the place of drivers and

bosses. All political law, statute and common, gets its right to

operate from the statute; therefore, all political law is statute law.

A statute law is a written scheme by which cunning takes advantage of

the unsuspecting, and provides the inducement to do so, and protects

the one who does it. In other words, a statute is the science of

rascality or the law of usurpation. If a few sharks rob mankind of

all the earth,—turn them all out of house and home, make them ragged

slaves and beggars, and freeze and starve them to death,—still

they are expected to obey the statute because it is sacred. This

ridiculous nonsense, that human laws are sacred, and that if they are

not respected and continued we cannot prosper, is the stupidest and

most criminal nightmare of the age. Statutes are the last and greatest

curse of men, and, when destroyed, the world will be free.... The

statute law is the great science of rascality, by which alone the few

trample upon and enslave the many. There are natural laws provided

for every work of man. Natural laws are self-operating. They punish

all who violate them, and reward all who obey them. They cannot be

repealed, amended, dodged or bribed, and it costs neither time, money

nor attention to apply them. It is time to stop legislation against

them. We want to obey laws, not men, nor the tricks of men. Statutes

are human tricks. The law—the statute law—is the coward’s weapon,

the tool of the thief.... Free access to the means of production is

the natural right of every man able and willing to work. It is the

legal right of the capitalist to refuse such access to labor, and to

take from the laborer all the wealth he creates over and above a bare

subsistence for allowing him the privilege of working. A laborer has

the natural right to life, and, as life is impossible without the

means of production, the equal right to life involves an equal right

to the means of production.... Laws—just laws—natural laws—are

not made; they are discovered. Law-enacting is an insult to divine

intelligence; and law-enforcing is the impeachment of God’s integrity

and His power.

August Spies on the same memorable occasion gave his views of Socialism

in these words:

Socialism is a constructive and not a destructive science. While

capitalism expropriates the masses for the benefit of the privileged

class; while capitalism is that school of economics which teaches

how one can live upon the labor (_i. e._, property) of the other,

Socialism teaches how all may possess property, and further teaches

that every man must work honestly for his own living, and not be

playing the respectable Board of Trade man, or any other highly too

respectable business man or banker. Socialism, in short, seeks to

establish a universal system of coöperation and to render accessible

to each and every member of the human family the achievements

and benefits of civilization, which, under capitalism, are being

monopolized by a privileged class, and employed, not, as they should

be, for the common good of all, but for the brutish gratification of

an avaricious class. Under capitalism, the great inventions of the

past, far from being a blessing for mankind, have been turned into a

curse! Socialism teaches that machines, the means of transportation

and communication, are the result of the combined efforts of society,

past and present, and that they are therefore rightfully the

indivisible property of society, just the same as the soil and the

mines and all natural gifts should be. This declaration implies that

those who have appropriated this wealth wrongfully, though lawfully,

shall be expropriated by society. The expropriation of the masses

by the monopolists has reached such a degree that the expropriation

of the expropriateurs has become an imperative necessity, an act of

social self-preservation. Society will reclaim its own even though you

erect a gibbet on every street-corner. And Anarchism, this terrible

“ism,” deduces that under a coöperative organization of society,

under economic equality and individual independence, the “state”—the

political state—will pass into barbaric antiquity. And we will be

where all are free, where there are no longer masters and servants.

Where intellect stands for brute force, there will no longer be any

use for the policeman and militia to preserve the so-called “peace and

order.” Anarchism, or Socialism, means the reorganization of society

upon scientific principles and the abolition of causes which produce

vice and crime.

Michael Schwab, in his utterances before the same tribunal, held as

follows:

Socialism, as we understand it, means that land and machinery shall be

held in common by the people. The production of goods shall be carried

on by producing groups which shall supply the demands of the people.

Under such a system every human being would have an opportunity to do

useful work, and no doubt would work. Some hours’ work every day would

suffice to produce all that, according to statistics, is necessary for

a comfortable living. Time would be left to cultivate the mind and to

further science and art. That is what Socialists propose. According

to our vocabulary, Anarchy is a state of society in which the only

government is reason. A state of society in which all human beings do

right for the simple reason that it is right and hate wrong because it

is wrong. In such a society no laws, no compulsion will be necessary.

Samuel Fielden, standing before the same court, also dwelt upon

Socialism, saying:

And it will be a good time, a grand day for the world; it will be a

grand day for humanity; it will never have taken a step so far onward

toward perfection, if it can ever reach that goal, as it will when

it accepts the principles of Socialism. They are the principles that

injure no man. They are the principles that consider the interest of

every one. They are the principles which will do away with wrong; and

injustice and suffering will be reduced at least to a minimum under

such an organization of society. As compared to the present struggle

for existence, which is degrading society and making men merely things

and animals, Socialism will give them opportunities of developing the

possibilities of their nature.

The platform of the International Association of Workingmen, indorsed

by the local organization, formulates the principles of Socialism as

follows:

1. Destruction of existing class domination, through inexorable

revolution and international activity.

2. The building of a free society on communistic organizations or

production.

3. Free exchange of equivalent products through the productive

organization without jobbing and profit-making.

4. Organization of the educational system upon a non-religious and

scientific and equal basis for both sexes.

5. Equal rights for all, without distinction of sex or race.

6. The regulation of public affairs through agreements between the

independent communes and confederacies.

The above was published in the _Alarm_ of November 1, 1884, with the

following comment:

Proletarians of all countries, unite. Fellow workmen, all we need for

the achievement of this great end is organization and unity.

There exists now no great obstacle to that unity. The work of peaceful

education and revolutionary conspiracy will, can and ought to run in

parallel lines.

The day has come for solidarity. Join our ranks! Let the drum beat

defiantly the roll of battle; workingmen of all lands, unite! You have

nothing to lose but your chains; you have a world to win. Tremble,

oppressors of the world! Not far beyond your purblind sight there dawn

the scarlet and sable lights of the judgment day!

Such, in brief, are the aims of Socialism as expounded by its most

extreme representatives. The state of society they seek to establish

may be highly beneficial to a class which, under any conditions,

lacks sobriety, frugality, thrift and self-reliance; but just where

the general mass of humanity is to be bettered or elevated, socially,

morally or politically, is a point not satisfactorily explained. Their

theory may look well on paper, and their glittering generalities may

draw adherents from the ranks of the illiterate and the vicious, but a

condition of society in which there are no masters and no authority can

only lead to chaos. In a society “in which all human beings do right

for the simple reason that it is right,” there can be neither stability

nor permanence, unless human nature is recast, reconstructed and

regenerated. Human nature must be treated as it is found in the general

make-up of man; and therefore a society in which all special desires,

all ambition and all self-elevation have been eliminated, precludes

development and progress. It reduces everything to utter shiftlessness

and stagnation. In such a society there can be no incentive to great

achievements in art, literature, mechanics or invention. If all are

to be placed on an equal footing, the ignorant with the educated, the

dullard with the genius, the profligate with the provident, and the

drunken wretch with the industrious, what encouragement for special

effort? If you “render accessible to each and every member of the

human family the achievements and benefits of civilization,” holding

“property in common,” why should a man rack his brain or strain his

muscles in producing something which he expects to prove remunerative

to himself in some way, but which under the Socialistic state would

go to the financial benefit of all? Take away all incentive to

improvement, and you make life scarcely worth the living. Where the

state, or the “independent commune,” is to be entrusted with the

care and equal distribution of wealth and the employment of men, the

individual will give little concern for the morrow or for anything

beyond his immediate wants. What need he accomplish more than his

neighbor, since everything that is produced is shared jointly?

In the Socialistic society, every man might “work honestly for his own

living,” as Spies declares, but what would be the inevitable result of

a system in which the state or commune undertakes to see that all have

employment?

History does not leave us room for doubt. The various constitutions

of France recognized the right of the people to employment. It

was provided in 1792 that it was the duty of society to afford

such employment, and in the following year it was added that the

remuneration of the laborer should be sufficient to support him. This

doctrine was recognized until 1819, when it fell into “innocuous

desuetude,” and it was not revived until 1848. In that year a placard

appeared on the dead walls of Paris, to the following effect:

The Provisional Government of the French Republic guarantees existence

to the laborer by labor. It guarantees labor to every citizen. It

guarantees that laborers may associate to obtain the profits of their

legitimate labor.

In consequence of this proclamation the Government was appealed to,

and national work-shops were established under the auspices of the

Government. The establishments were open to all, but, as no one was

specially interested in their financial success, they soon proved

too great a drain upon the resources of the nation. Failure was the

result. In the assignment of work at the factories, skill and fitness

never entered into consideration. One workman was as good as another,

and the men, so long as they had the Government at their back, with

living guaranteed, did not bother much about the kind of article they

produced. The result was that inferior goods were thrown upon the

market, and purchasers were difficult to find. This speedily led to the

closing of the work-shops, and since then the French Government has

never maintained that society at large must operate work-shops for the

benefit of all. Any commune that undertakes the same task again must

similarly fail.

[Illustration: BANNERS OF THE SOCIAL REVOLUTION—II. FROM PHOTOGRAPHS.

1. “Down with all Laws.” 6. “Long live the Social Revolution!”]

Now, suppose that, in the new economic conditions, it should be

determined by the “independent communes” that wages should in a measure

be fixed according to the skill, ability and energy of the workingmen,

what sort of allotment would fall to the great body of workers?

Edward Atkinson, an accurate statistician of world-wide reputation,

has furnished the public with a compilation showing what each would

receive if the aggregate production in the United States were divided

among its inhabitants. The annual production, he calculates, of all the

industries of our country, does not exceed $200 per head of population.

This would give a total of $12,000,000. If this were divided equally

among families of five persons each, on a basis of a sixty-million

population, each family would have $1,000 per annum. But, as I have

said, suppose some families secure more than others, on account of

greater efficiency, and that one-third of these families secure $2,000

each per annum. The remaining two-thirds would only secure an average

of $500. “Suppose,” it has been said, “one-half of this third to be

fortunate enough, or skillful enough, to increase their average to

$3,000. The remaining half continuing at $2,000, the average share of

the two-thirds would fall to $250, or $50 only per head, per annum.”

As Prof. Barnard, dwelling upon the facts to be deduced from Atkinson’s

showing, says: “Inasmuch as the idea of an average implies that as

many are below it as are above it, it is easy to see that the only

way of removing the scourge of poverty from the entire human race is

to increase the productiveness of labor so that want can only be a

consequence of willful idleness, or improvidence, or vice.”

In the “wonderful readjustment” of wealth and the products of labor

Socialists propose to inaugurate, there would be everywhere more

misery, more poverty and more crime than the people are now contending

with in the purlieus of London and Paris. That there is room for

improvement in the condition of our social state is true, but that

changes for the better can be obtained by Socialism and by means of

violence is false. These social as well as governmental improvements

can only be brought about by peaceable means. Never by force, as the

logic of events demonstrated in the Cook County Jail. There is no

question that crack-brained theorists will continue to spring up and

exist. They have existed in the past. The Babeufs, the Lassalles, the

Fouriers and the Karl Marxes may continue to preach their one-sided

ideas, but universal education in the United States and the general

morality of the masses may be safely counted upon as a guaranty that

neither the gospel of violence nor isolated cases of bloodshed will

ever succeed in establishing exploded and ruinous theories of politics.

[Illustration: A GROUP OF ANARCHISTS.

From a Photograph.—The central figure is that of a man in the uniform

of the Lehr und Wehr Verein. The reclining figure in foreground is

Moritz Neff, proprietor of Neff’s Hall.]

AFTER the Socialists of Chicago had organized their military companies,

it soon became evident that they intended to use their forces against

organized society, and as they paraded them before the community on all

public occasions as a menace to good order, the Illinois Legislature

in 1879 settled their status effectually by adopting a law prohibiting

armed forces in the State except those willing to swear to support

the institutions of the State as well as of the nation, or to become

members of the State militia. It was also made a punishable offense for

any body of men to assemble with arms, drill or parade within the State

without authority. The Socialists were not seeking State honors, and

they took an appeal to the State Supreme Court on the ground that the

legislative act was unconstitutional. They were beaten, and accordingly

forced to abandon their ten companies.

From carrying arms, however, they soon turned their attention to the

study of explosives. They began experiments at once, and some years

later boldly urged their adherents to become adepts in the manufacture

and use of the most approved explosive—dynamite.

In the _Alarm_ of October 18, 1884, the following was published:

One man armed with a dynamite bomb is equal to one regiment of

militia, when it is used at the right time and place. Anarchists are

of the opinion that the bayonet and Gatling gun will cut but sorry

part in the social revolution. The whole method of warfare has been

revolutionized by latter-day discoveries of science, and the American

people will avail themselves of its advantages in the conflict with

upstarts and contemptible braggarts who expect to continue their

rascality under the plea of preserving law and order.

The same paper, in its issue of November 1, 1884, contained this

pronunciamento:

How can all this be done? Simply by making ourselves masters of the

use of dynamite, then declaring we will make no further claim to

ownership in anything, and deny every other person’s right to be the

owner of anything, and administer instant death, by any and all means,

to any and every person who attempts to continue to claim personal

ownership in anything. This method, and this alone, can relieve the

world of this infernal monster called the “right of property.”

Let us try and not strike too soon, when our numbers are too small, or

before more of us understand the use and manufacture of the weapons.

To avoid unnecessary bloodshed, confusion and discouragement, we must

be prepared, know why we strike and for just what we strike, and then

strike in unison and with all our might.

Our war is not against men, but against systems; yet we must prepare

to kill men who will try to defeat our cause, or we will strive in

vain.

The rich are only worse than the poor because they have more power to

wield this infernal “property right,” and because they have more power

to reform, and take less interest in doing so. Therefore, it is easy

to see where the bloodiest blows must be dealt.

We can expect but few or no converts among the rich, and it will be

better for our cause if they do not wait for us to strike first.

Again, on February 21, 1885, from the same paper:

The deep-rooted, malignant evil which compels the wealth-producers to

become the independent hirelings of a few capitalistic czars, can not

be reached by means of the ballot.

The ballot can be wielded by free men alone; but slaves can only

revolt and rise in insurrection against their despoilers.

Let us bear in mind the fact that here in America, as elsewhere,

the worker is held in economic bondage by the use of force, and the

employment of force, therefore, becomes a necessity to his economic

preservation. Poverty can’t vote!

In the same issue also appeared the following:

Dynamite! Of all the good stuff, this is the stuff. Stuff several

pounds of this sublime stuff into an inch pipe (gas or water pipe),

plug up both ends, insert a cap with a fuse attached, place this in

the immediate neighborhood of a lot of rich loafers who live by the

sweat of other people’s brows, and light the fuse. A most cheerful and

gratifying result will follow. In giving dynamite to the downtrodden

millions of the globe science has done its best work. The dear stuff

can be carried in the pocket without danger, while it is a formidable

weapon against any force of militia, police or detectives that may

want to stifle the cry for justice that goes forth from the plundered

slaves. It is something not very ornamental, but exceedingly useful.

It can be used against persons and things. It is better to use it

against the former than against bricks and masonry. It is a genuine

boon for the disinherited, while it brings terror and fear to the

robbers. A pound of this good stuff beats a bushel of ballots all

hollow, and don’t you forget it! Our law-makers might as well try to

sit down on the crater of a volcano or a bayonet as to endeavor to

stop the manufacture and use of dynamite. It takes more justice and

right than is contained in laws to quiet the spirit of unrest.

In the _Arbeiter-Zeitung_ of March 19, 1886, appeared the following,

after many articles had been previously published of the same tenor as

those in the _Alarm_:

The only aim of the workingman should be the liberation of mankind

from the shackles of the existing damnable slavery. Here, in America,

where the workingman possesses yet the freedom of meeting, of speech,

and of the press, most should be done for the emancipation of

suffering mankind. But the press gang and the teachers in the schools

do all in their power to keep the people in the dark. Thus everything

tends to degrade mankind more and more, from day to day, and this

effects a “beastening,” as is observable with Irishmen, and more

apparent, even, with the Chinese.

If we do not soon bestir ourselves for a bloody revolution, we can

not leave anything to our children but poverty and slavery. Therefore

prepare yourselves, in all quietness, for the revolution.

The following extracts are from the first number of the _Anarchist_,

Engel’s paper, dated January 1, 1886, with the motto, “All government

we hate”:

Workingmen and fellows: We recognize it our duty to contend against

existing rule, but he who would war successfully must equip himself

with all implements adapted to destroy his opponents and secure

victory. In consideration thereof we have resolved to publish the

_Anarchist_ as a line in the fight for the disinherited. It is

necessary to disseminate Anarchistic doctrine. As we strive for

freedom from government we advocate the principle of autonomy, in

this sense: We strive towards the overthrow of the existing order,

that an end may be put to the “abhorrent work of destruction on the

part of mankind, and fratricide done away.” The equality of all,

without distinction of race, color or nationality, is our fundamental

principle, thus ending rule and servitude. We reject reformatory

endeavors as useless play, adding to the derision and oppression of

the workingmen. Against the never-to-be-satisfied ferocity of capital

we recommend the radical means of the present age. All endeavors of

the working classes not aiming at the overthrow of existing conditions

of ownership and at complete self-government are to us reactionary.

The idea of the absence of authority warrants that we will carry on a

fight of principles only....

No one can deny that man brings with him into the world the right to

live. But this is denied by the property beast. He who has the whip

of power will brandish it over the poor. What does the world offer to

the poor who are compelled to carry on a mere struggle for existence?

Patented machinery, combined with capital and other means of

preservation, denies work to the workmen on account of the excessive

offer of working powers. Workingmen should, therefore, enter the ranks

of those who propose to set aside the present system of inequality

and build up a system of equality and freedom. Let every one join the

International Workingmen’s Association, and arm himself with the best

weapons of modern times....

The authorities in America have hitherto refused to prosecute

Anarchists as the European powers do, not because of hatred to

despotism, but from fear that the American people might be driven

into Anarchism. As Anarchists increase, however, it is intended to

do away with them by slow degrees. To this end a bill was introduced

in Congress refusing to and revoking citizenship of such. Yet

the Anarchist declines citizenship because he regards himself as

cosmopolitan. We hope for more foolish things to open the eyes of

American workingmen....

_Reflections of an Anarchist at the Grave of Leiske._—After the

workingman becomes a journeyman he feels free, casts a glance into the

world—it is glorious, beautiful. He thinks there is happiness for him

somewhere. He proposes to go abroad, but a terrible cry falls upon his

ears—the outcry of a tormented people. He inquires, have the pariahs

of to-day a right to live? and answers yes. Why otherwise born, if

suffered to die with hunger? And hunger and poverty are the results of

the stealings of the rich. Having thus concluded, he swears to help in

the work of liberation, “in the great struggle of mankind for a better

condition;” to take vengeance upon those responsible for this misery.

In his investigations he learns the utter vileness of the police

power, and a policeman is killed. Whereupon the workman is arrested,

charged with the murder of Rumpf, and killed after nearly a year of

most devilish torture. With what contempt Leiske met his executioners,

and with what heroism he went unto his death, is known to our fellows,

and he shall be avenged.

The _Alarm_, January 13, 1885:

“Force the only defense against injustice and oppression.” Because

the Socialists advocate resistance, they are accused of brutality and

want of wisdom. All men agree that themselves should not be trampled

upon by others. If you can compel a man to agree to allow others to

exercise control over him, you will find that the soldier will soon

claim all you have acquired for yourselves. This only teaches that

it is dangerous for the wicked to teach war; not so with justice.

Justice can never create opposition to itself. Therefore “justice is

always safe in accumulating force, while injustice can only accumulate

force at its peril.” We are told force is cruel, but this is only true

when the opposition is less cruel. If the opposition is relentless

power, starving, freezing, etc., and the application of force will

require less suffering, then force is humane. Therefore we say that

dynamite is both humane and economical. It will, at the expense of

less suffering, prevent more. It is not humane to compel ten persons

to starve to death, when the execution of five persons would prevent

it. A system that is starving and freezing tens of thousands of little

children, in the midst of a world of plenty, cannot be defended

against dynamiters on the ground of humanity. If every child that

starved to death in the United States were retaliated for by the

execution of a rich man in his own parlor, the brutal system of wage

property would not last six weeks. It is a wonder that a father, after

his vain search for bread, can see his little ones starve or freeze,

without striking that vengeful, just and bloody blow at the cause that

would prevent other little ones suffering a similar fate. It is not

probable that men will always endure this cruel, relentless process of

monopoly and competition.

The privileged class use force to perpetuate their power, and the

despoiled workers must use force to prevent it.

The _Alarm_, July 25, 1885:

STREET FIGHTING.

_How to Meet the Enemy.—Some Valuable Hints for the Revolutionary

Soldiers.—What an Officer of the United States Army has to Say._

The following letter, published in the San Francisco _Truth_ some time

ago, will be read with interest. The letter is quoted as follows, in

substance: “I am an officer in the army of the United States, and know

whereof I write. John Upton said to me, with great earnestness, that

the day of armies is passing away. I believe this. This introduces

my subject. I desire to place the details of the science of butchery

before the people; to point out its weak points, so that in future

uprisings the people may stand some chance of winning. They have

for the past twenty years been overcome only because of their own

ignorance. They have been slaughtered and subdued because of a lack

of coolness, want of knowledge, and adherence to what is called

‘humanity,’ ‘honorable warfare,’ etc. I assume that my readers agree

with me that against tyrants all means are legitimate, and that in war

that course is best, though bloodiest, which soonest ends the contest.

My purpose is to persuade the people to add a little common sense in

future to their heroism, and thus insure success.

[Illustration: 1. “The greatest crime these days is Poverty.”

2. “UNITED WE STAND DIVIDED WE FALL!”

3. “Millions work for the benefit of the few. Let us work for

ourselves.”

4. “Dick Oglesby who murdered 3 poor workingmen in lemont is not in

this procession (You can see him later.)”

5. “Carter Harrison who clubbed out citizens during the carmens strike

is not in this procession (You can see him later.)”

6. This is a bit of doggerel directed against the capitalistic press,

and in advocacy of the _Arbeiter-Zeitung_ and of Johann Most’s paper,

_Die Freiheit_.

7. “Proletarians of all lands, unite.”

8. This is a bit of Socialist “poetry” expatiating on the efficacy of

the “boycott.”

BANNERS OF THE SOCIAL REVOLUTION—III. FROM PHOTOGRAPHS.]

“United States and State regiments are organized on the unit of four,

which permits the most rapid and effective change of front that can be

devised. The art of war consists in making soldiers fight. The line

of retreat must be kept open to avoid capture. In future revolts the

people shall assume the aggressive. Army officers have wasted years

of study over the science of street fighting, unavailingly. The plan

below shows a method adopted as best. The troops are formed on the

street in two bodies in column of four, headed by a Gatling gun. On

the sidewalk a line of skirmishers and sharpshooters, whose duty it is

to fire into the houses, the whole advancing cautiously. When a cross

street is reached, a company is left to hold it, in order to keep

open the avenue of retreat. Military knowledge has become popularized

since 1877, and now, in almost any contest, it would be easy to find

some fair leaders of the people who would devise some means of meeting

such an advance, as indicated by the following diagram. The diagram

represents a street corner. The plan is, at the street crossing to

have bodies of revolutionists with movable barracks placed obliquely

on the cross street, and who from there will fire vigorously upon

the advancing column. They have supporters also in the building,

also at the corner, whose duty is to throw dynamite upon the troops.

If the position is carried, the party defending escape through the

cross streets. The rear of the column can also be attacked from the

cross streets. If the men in the barricades are armed with the new

international dynamite rifle (which I am told exists in the hands of

the revolutionists), I give it as a careful technical opinion, that,

pursuing these tactics under brave and able leaders, fifty men can

hold at bay and finally destroy in any of your cities an attacking

force of five thousand troops.” Signed “R. S. S.” Alcatraz Island,

December 8.

The _Alarm_, December 26, 1885:

_Bakounine’s Groundwork for the Social Revolution.—A Revolutionist’s

Duty to Himself. (Free translation from the German.)_

1. The revolutionist is self-offered; has no personal interest, but is

absorbed by the one passion, the revolution.

2. He is at war with the existing order of society and lives to

destroy it.

3. He despises society in its present form and leaves its

reorganization to the future, himself knowing only the science of

destruction. He studies mathematics, chemistry, etc., for this

purpose. The quick and sure overthrow of the present unreasonable

order is his object.

4. He despises public sentiment and acknowledges as moral whatever

favors the revolution; as criminal whatever opposes it.

5. He is consecrated; he will not spare, nor does he expect mercy.

Between him and society reigns the war of death or life.

6. Stringent with himself, he must be stringent with others. All

sentiment must be suppressed by his passion for the revolutionary

work. He must be ready to die and to kill.

7. He excludes romance and sentiment and also personal hatred

and revenge; never obeying his personal inclinations, but his

revolutionary duty.

_Toward his Comrades._

8. His friendship is only for his comrade, and is measured by that

comrade’s usefulness in the practical work of the revolution.

9. As to important affairs, he must consult with his comrades, but in

execution depend upon himself. Each must be self-operating, and must

ask help only when imperatively necessary.

10. He shall use himself and his subordinates as capital to be used

for the work of revolution, but no part of which can he dispose of

without the consent of the persons involved.

11. If a comrade is in danger, he shall not consider his personal

feelings, but the interest of the cause.

_His Duty toward Society._

12. A new candidate can be taken into the company only after proof of

his merit, and upon unanimous consent.

13. He lives in a so-called civilized world because he believes in

its speedy destruction. He clings to nothing as it now is, and does

not hesitate to destroy any institution. He is no revolutionist if

arrested by personal ties.

14. He must obtain entrance everywhere, even in the detective agency

and the emperor’s palace.

15. The present society should be divided into categories, the first

including those sentenced to immediate death, the others classifying

the delinquents according to their rascality.

16. The lists are not to be influenced by personal considerations, but

those are to be first destroyed whose death can terrify governments

and deprive them of their most intelligent agents.

[Illustration: THE RED BANNER OF THE CARPENTERS’ UNION.

From a Photograph.]

17. The second category embraces those who are permitted to live, but

whose evil deeds will drive the people to open revolt.

18. The third category embraces the dissolute rich whose secrets must

be discovered in order to control their resources.

19. The fourth category consists of ambitious officials and liberals

whose purposes we must discover so as to prevent their withdrawing

from our cause.

20. The fifth category consists of doctrinaire conspirators; they must

be urged to action.

21. The sixth category is the women, who are divided into three

classes: First, the brainless and heartless; second, the passionate

and qualified; and, third, the wholly consecrated, who are to be

guarded as the most valuable part of the revolutionary treasures.

The _Alarm_ of January 9, 1886, then edited, in the absence of its

editor and his assistant, by August Spies, contained this suggestive

editorial:

“_The Right to Bear Arms._”—After the conspiracy of the workingmen,

the working classes, in 1877, the breaking up of the meeting on the

Haymarket Square, the brutal assault upon a gathering of furniture

workers in Vorwaerts Turner Hall, the murder of Tessman, and the

general clubbing and shooting down of peaceably inclined wage-workers,

the proletarians organized the Lehr und Wehr Verein, which in about

a year and a half had grown to a membership of one thousand. This

was regarded by the capitalists as a menace, and they procured the

passage of the militia law, under which it became an offense for

any body of men, other than those authorized by the Governor, to

assemble with arms, drill or parade the streets. The members of the

Lehr und Wehr Verein, mostly Socialists, who believed in the ballot,

made up a test case to determine the constitutionality of this act,

rejecting the counsel of the extremists. Judge Barnum held the law to

be unconstitutional—an appeal was taken—and the Supreme Court upset

this decision and held the law constitutional. Thereupon the Lehr und

Wehr Verein applied to the Supreme Court of the United States, which

within a few days affirmed the decision of the Supreme Court of the

State. Do we need comment on this?

That militia law has had its uses. Where there was before a military

body publicly organized, whose strength could be easily ascertained,

now there exists an organization whose members cannot be estimated,

and a network of destructive agencies of modern military character

that will defy suppression.

The _Arbeiter-Zeitung_, February 17, editorial:

In France, during strikes, etc., a new method is lately adopted. The

workingmen barricade themselves in the factories with provisions,

taking possession of the property, which the manufacturers desire to

preserve, and will only resort to force for their ejection in the

most extreme case. The conflict between capitalism and workingmen is

growing constantly sharper, and the indication is that force will

bring about decisive results in the battle for liberty.

The _Arbeiter-Zeitung_ of April 30:

We are advised that the police are ordered to be ready for a conflict

upon Saturday of next week. The capitalists are thirsting for the

blood of workingmen. The workingmen refuse longer to be tortured and

treated like dogs, and for this opposition the capitalists cry for

blood. Perhaps they may have it, and lose some of their own. To the

workingmen we again say: Arm yourselves, but conceal your arms lest

they be stolen from you.

The _Arbeiter-Zeitung_, May 3:

Courage, courage, is our cry. Don’t forget the words of Herways: “The

host of the oppressors grow pale when thou, weary of thy burden, in

the corner puttest the plow; when thou sayest, ‘It is enough.’”

The _Arbeiter-Zeitung_, May 4:

Blood has flown. It happened as it had to. The militia have not been

drilling in vain. It is historical that private property had its

origin in violence. The war of classes has come. Yesterday, in front

of McCormick’s factory, workmen were shot down whose blood cries for

vengeance. In the past, countless victims have been offered on the

altars of the golden calf amid the shouts of the capitalistic robbers.

One has only to think of East St. Louis, Chicago and other places, to

recognize the tactics of the extortioners. The white terror will be

answered with the red, for the workmen are not asleep. They modestly

asked for eight hours. The answer was to drill the police force and

militia, and browbeat those advocating the change. And yesterday blood

flowed—the reply of these devils to this modest petition of their

slaves. Death rather than a life of wretchedness. The capitalistic

tiger lies ready for the jump, his eyes sparkling, eager for murder,

and his clutches drawn tight. Self-defense cries, “To arms, to arms!”

If you do not defend yourselves, you will be ground by the animal’s

teeth.

The powers hostile to the workingmen have made common cause, and our

differences must be subordinated to the common purpose. The statement

of the capitalistic press, that the workmen yesterday fired first, is

a bold, barefaced lie.

In the poor shanty miserably clad women and children are weeping for

husband and father. In the palace they clink glasses filled with

costly wine and drink to the happiness of the bloody bandits of law

and order. Dry your tears, ye poor and wretched; take heart, ye

slaves; arise in your might and overthrow the system of robbery.

These are a few of the many articles emanating from the Socialistic

propaganda, calling the rabble to murder and destruction. Other

declarations printed in the _Arbeiter-Zeitung_ and pronounced upon the

stump are in the same virulent spirit, couched in varying language as

suggested by the events of the moment, but all breathing defiance and

death to the so-called “capitalistic class.” There are also minute and

specific directions for the preparation as well as the use of dynamite,

Herr Most’s work on that subject having been largely drawn upon for

the enlightenment of those who believed that dynamite is the weapon

through the use of which the social revolution can be accomplished.

Paragraphs, sections and chapters of Bakounine’s “Groundwork for the

Social Revolution” were likewise read to the Socialists and published

in their organs.

[Illustration: ATTEMPT OF DR. NOBILING TO ASSASSINATE THE EMPEROR OF

GERMANY.]

Another source from which to draw inspiration was Reinsdorf, the

apostle of Anarchy in Germany. The Chicago Anarchists regarded him as a

splendid representative of their class, and praised his attempt on the

life of the Emperor of Germany. His death on the scaffold was regarded

as martyrdom, and his deeds were frequently extolled. His confederates

in conspiracy, Hoedel and Nobiling, were referred to in terms of praise

by George A. Schilling at a meeting in West Twelfth Street Turner

Hall. Louis Lingg had been personally acquainted with Reinsdorf, and

gloried in the man’s work and courage. The extreme section of the

Chicago Socialists always sought to inculcate his ideas, and that the

reader may gain some notion of Reinsdorf’s character, I reproduce the

following translation from a German Socialistic paper, showing his

career:

[Illustration: AUGUST REINSDORF.]

He was the principal leader of all the Anarchists in Germany. The

people looked upon him as the savior of their great cause. He was

admired not only by men, but also by women. Wherever he went he was

given great receptions, and he had many pupils.

Reinsdorf was born in Prussia. When he became of age, he joined

the party, and, by his good and rapid work, became in a short time

the father of the Anarchistic agitation. But the law pursued him,

and he wandered from state to state. In the year 1876 we find him

in Switzerland, where he had many followers. One of his pupils and

admirers was Max Hoedel, who with Reinsdorf conceived a plot to murder

King William of Prussia. The attack upon his life was made by Hoedel

on the 11th day of May, 1878. He fired several shots at the aged

warrior, but failed, as none of them took effect. They missed their

mark. Not satisfied with this, another man, Dr. Nobiling, also a

pupil of Reinsdorf, made another attempt three weeks later, by firing

a shot-gun filled with buck-shot at the old King; but again without

effect. Nobiling’s deed was the consequence of Hoedel’s attempt, and

Reinsdorf was the agitator. Failing in this, they concluded to wait

some time until their party should get stronger and could secure

better material. Among others Louis Lingg joined the Anarchists in

Zurich. Louis was then very young, but he became as radical as their

chief leader. The Socialists were to have held a Congress there

in May, 1880, but the gathering did not take place, as the police

had notice, and Reinsdorf and his followers were compelled to leave

Zurich and go to Freiburg (Baden), where they held secret meetings

and where Reinsdorf declared that he himself would go to Berlin and

kill the miserable mahdi by stabbing him to the heart. He went to

Berlin to carry out this plan, but was arrested by the police. They

could not make out a case of conspiracy against him, but he was sent

to prison for several months on the charge of carrying a dagger.

After his discharge Reinsdorf traveled to and from Switzerland

to Germany, France and Belgium, speaking in all places where he

stopped, and gaining many followers. His only desire was to put old

Emperor William (commonly called “old Lehmann”) out of the way—to

do something great so that all the people would look up to him. His

only targets were royal palaces and the palaces of diplomates. He

and others then formed a plan to murder the King, and Bismarck, and

all the princes and others who were to participate in the dedication

of the Germania monument at Ruedesheim on the 28th day of September,

1883. But Reinsdorf met with an accident while crossing a railroad

track, and was severely injured. This was a very painful situation for

Reinsdorf. The day for action drew near, but he was confined to his

bed. Should this beautiful plan be given up on that account? Never!

Could not other people accomplish what he had thought out? Certainly.

But was it sure that they would have the necessary courage at the

critical moment? Could he trust them? Tormented by such thoughts,

Reinsdorf finally submitted to the inevitable and confided his mission

to two of his comrades. He called these people to his bedside and told

them what he wanted done. He presented his plan in detail. Rupsch

and Kuechler—these are their names—pledged themselves to do what

he desired. They started on the journey with the necessary material,

reached Ruedesheim safely, and on the night of the 27th they proceeded

to a spot not far from the monument, where the railroad runs near the

edge of the forest. They filled a culvert with a large quantity of

dynamite, put a fulminating cap into it and drew the fuse into the

forest. It was raining at the time, and they covered the fuse with

moist ground and tied the end of it to a tree, which they marked by

cutting into it. They then returned to Ruedesheim. The next morning

they returned to the place. The royal train came. Kuechler gave the

signal; Rupsch held his burning cigar to the fuse. One moment of

breathless expectation! The train passed, and the explosion—failed.

Kuechler asked Rupsch about the failure. The latter showed that the

end of the fuse had been lighted, but did not burn because it was

damp. They did not give up hope, as the train had to return the same

way after the ceremonies were over. A new fuse was attached. Again

the royal party passed over the critical ground, where death had

been prepared for them. Rupsch lit the fuse again, but it did not

burn. An investigation afterwards showed that the fuse only burned

a short length and then went out. They had followed all Reinsdorf’s

instructions but one—instead of water-proof fuse they had supplied

themselves with the common kind. With mutual recriminations, Kuechler

and Rupsch took the dynamite from under the culvert and went back to

Ruedesheim, where they got gloriously drunk. After they had sobered

up, they returned to Elberfeld and reported to Reinsdorf, who already

knew that his beautiful plan had miscarried. With great wrath he

listened to them and said: “No such thing could have happened to me.”

He thought there would be another chance. Then he would not be in the

hospital, but could carry it out himself. His hopes were in vain.

After his discharge from the hospital in Elberfeld, he proceeded to

Frankfort-on-the-Main, where he was arrested. The police found out

that he was an accomplice in the conspiracy, but, putting him through

the sieve, they failed to get anything out of him, as he would not

answer a single question. He said: “You may ask me as much as you

wish, I shall not answer.” Bachman, one of his companions and an

accomplice, escaped to Luxemburg, where he thought he would be safe

from the law, but he also was arrested and extradited and sent to

Elberfeld to keep Reinsdorf company, together with Rupsch and Kuechler.

Reinsdorf and his accomplices were tried before the courts of Leipsic,

and the trial lasted seven days. Bachman and two others were sentenced

to ten years in the penitentiary. Rupsch got a life sentence, while

Reinsdorf was sentenced to be beheaded. At his trial Reinsdorf was as

stubborn as ever. He denied everything. When he was asked who he was

he answered:

“I am an Anarchist.”

“What is Anarchy?” he was asked.

“A company in which every sensible man can develop his ability. To

permit this no one should be burdened with excessive labor; want and

misery should be banished; every force should cease; every stupidity,

every superstition should be banished from the world.”

The presiding judge asked him if he was guilty or not, and to answer

with “yes” or “no.”

Reinsdorf answered with a steady voice: “I look upon this whole thing

as a question of power. If we German Anarchists had a couple of army

corps at our disposition, then I would not have to talk to this court.

I for my part have nothing to say. Do with me as you please.”

After the court had finished, Reinsdorf resumed his remarks and said:

“The attempt at Niederwald failed because ‘the hand of Providence

appeared,’ as the prosecution terms it. I tell you the awkward hand

of Rupsch did it. I am sorry to say I had no one else at my disposal.

I have nothing to repent, only that the attempt failed. At the

factories the people are going to ruin merely for the benefit of the

stockholders. These honest Christians swindle the working people of

half of their living. My lawyer wanted to save my head, but for such a

hounded proletarian as I am the quickest death is the best. If I had

ten heads I would offer them with joy and lay them on the block for

the good cause.”

Before going to the scaffold, Reinsdorf ate a hearty meal, smoked a

cigar, and sang a song. He walked steadily into the court-yard, where

the scaffold was standing, guarded by a squad of soldiers, besides

about a hundred other persons.

“Are you August Reinsdorf?” asked the sheriff.

“Yes, that I am.”

The death warrant was then read and the royal signature shown to him.

The executioner then bore him to the scaffold. Reinsdorf’s last words

were: “Down with barbarism; hurrah for Anarchy!” The axe fell and the

head was severed from his body.

The atonement for the decapitation of Reinsdorf followed quickly. The

sentence had hardly been carried into execution when, on the 13th of

January, 1885, “the miserable Rumpff,” as they called him, was stabbed

and killed by the hand of an Anarchist at Frankfort-on-the-Main. _Sic

semper tyrannis._

With such an example of courage before them, and the revenge

his execution invited, it is almost needless to remark that the

bloodthirsty Anarchists of Chicago read with eager avidity anything

pertaining to their hero. Accordingly, in the _Vorbote_ of December 16,

1885, the following is to be found:

REINSDORF’S INHERITANCE.

In the pamphlet about Reinsdorf there is a letter published which our

great martyr wrote the day previous to his decapitation. We are able

now to publish two other letters which Reinsdorf wrote at the same

time, to his parents and to his second brother.

One letter reads as follows:

HALLE, February 6, 1885.

_My Dear Brother_: To-day is my last day, and I could not let it pass

without writing to you to show you that I always remembered you with

brotherly love. When you have read this letter I shall be one of the

fortunates who are past and one of whom they can speak nothing but

good. Now, my deeds, specially alleged against me before the courts,

lie open before the world, and, although I am sentenced to death, I

have the feeling that I did my duty; and this feeling it is which

makes my last walk easy, to receive joyfully the everlasting sleep as

something well earned.

Dear August, you have often had trouble and sorrow, although you

are in the blossom of life. People usually heed the words of one

deceased more than the speeches of philosophers. I want to tell you

a few words. Bear with strength, endurance and friendly submission

the burden which you have laden upon yourself, and try to have

satisfaction in it, so you can raise your children that they may be

useful to you and an adornment to you. What would you gain by it,

if you should participate in the good-for-nothing diversions of the

people? Think, I could have done it, but I preferred the wandering

existence of an Anarchist.

When you, therefore, in years to come, look back upon the days of

honest, peaceable labor done, and of hard duty fulfilled, then you

will be filled with a joyful certainty and a quiet happiness that will

repay you for all your sufferings. We still live, unfortunately, in a

world of egotism and incompleteness, and only a few are in position to

swim against the stream—even at the risk of their lives. You never

did it. Good. So do your duty as the father of your family. Good-by.

Accept a greeting from my heart for your wife and family, from

Your brother,

AUGUST.

The second letter is directed to his parents:

HALLE, February 6, 1885.

_My Dear Parents_: Take in silence what cannot be helped! Who would

sacrifice their children, if not you, who have so many? Or should

the wealthy do it, when it is the cause of the poor for which we

fight? Or should we lay our hands in our laps and wait until others

have sacrificed themselves for us? And is it such a great sacrifice

I bring? Sick as I am, and with a prospect of long suffering, it

should be looked upon as a blessing when such an existence is put to

a quick death. And what an end is it? Whoever they are, progressive

or reactionary, liberal or conservative, they all hate the Anarchist

Reinsdorf. As they have condemned his doings, they cheer his death,

the crown of a faithful, self-sacrificing man. But his steadfastness,

in defiance of thousands of obstacles, no one can deny. And this shall

be your consolation.

How many have had to die for smaller causes? How many have lost their

lives in dynamite conquests? Take all this in consideration and

don’t let your hearts be made heavy through the babble of paltry and

narrow-minded people. My last thoughts are of you and of brothers and

sisters, and of the great cause for which I die. Deep-felt wishes

fill my heart for the prosperity of every one of you. Greetings to

my brothers and sisters, especially Carl, Emilie, Emma and Anna, to

whom I could not write personally. Shake once more their hands for me.

You and I embrace with all the love of childhood, and I greet you a

thousand times. Good-by, all.

Yours,

AUGUST.

What Herr Johann Most, the present American leader of the

irreconcilables, thought of Reinsdorf, may be judged by the following

extracts from Most’s biography:

From the 15th to the 22nd of December, 1884, eight workingmen, who had

been captured in the war of the poor against the rich, were sitting

in the dock, not to have justice passed upon them, but to await

the sentence of might which the judges, acting as mouth-pieces for

the ruling powers, had in preparation for them. The most prominent

figure among these victims of a barbaric order of society was August

Reinsdorf. To this man my little book is to be a tribute of esteem.

I am well aware of the difficulty of my otherwise quite modest

undertaking, to write a biography of the father of the Anarchistic

movement within the territory of the German language, yet I hope

to do the brothers near and far a service, for the time being at

least, by sketching for them a likeness of a true hero of the Social

Revolution....

Indeed Reinsdorf was not an agitator of the common sort. Speeches

delivered occasionally or written articles were to him only means to a

higher purpose—incentives to _action_.

Since he had recognized his ideal in Anarchism; ... since the

necessity of the “_tactics of terror_” had dawned upon him

in contradistinction to the tactics of petitioning, voting,

“parliamenting,” bargaining, and of the peaceable and legitimate

hide-and-seek practice—all his thinking and planning was directed to

but _one thing_, he knew of but _one_ endeavor, he gave his entire

being to but one motive power of the Social Revolution—that was the

propaganda of action.

[Illustration: JOHANN MOST.]

In this regard he may be put beside the most noble conspirators of

ancient and modern times....

To be a revolutionist indeed, one must possess the faculty of thinking

with the most acute clearness. But religious “fog” is the opposite of

clearness of intellect. Yea, where religious nonsense has once taken a

deep root, there every mental development is actually excluded, and a

kind of idiocy formally takes its place....

Quite different does the matter stand in the case of a “proletarian.”

If he once recognize the old Lord God with his thunderbolt as an

invented scarecrow which a shrewd gang of rascals have placed before

paradise,—that man should not eat of the tree of knowledge, but that

he should rather wait in patience for the roasted birds which, after

his death, come flying into his mouth from a heavenly kitchen,—if the

poor devil has learned to see that his namesake, too, wherewith they

had tried to scare him previously, is also an invention of malicious

swindlers,—then he soon applies the rule of the critic to the “high”

and “highest” idols of earth. He loses respect for the so-called

“Governments” and more and more learns to see in them a horde of

brutal tormentors. These custodians of existing treasures attract his

eye also to the possessors of the riches of the earth, and soon the

question dawns upon him, Who has created all these things? The answer

comes of itself. He and his like have done that. _To them_, therefore,

belongs the whole world. They only need to take.

_Thus_ the man, having cut loose from God, becomes the revolutionist

_par excellence_.

After Reinsdorf had succeeded in finding people who he thought were

fit to take part in revolutionary actions and even risk their lives,

he was also fortunate enough to discover a source from which dynamite,

that _glorious stuff_ which will literally make a road for liberty,

could be procured.

And how did he die? Shortly before the moment of death, and while in

the hands of the hangman, he cried out: “Down with barbarism! Let

Anarchy live!”

These are admonishing words, which no one should leave unheeded who

marches under the flag of the Revolution.

Well, then! Let us act accordingly! Away with all sentimental

hesitation when it comes to strike a blow against State, Church and

Society and their representatives, as well as against all that exists.

Let us never forget that the revolutionists of modern times can enter

into the society of free and equal men only over ruins and ashes, over

blood and dead bodies.

Let us rise to the height of an August Reinsdorf! Let us complete the

work which he so boldly began! Only thus can we avenge ourselves; only

thus can we show ourselves worthy of him; only thus can we conquer.

Workingmen! Look down into the freshly dug pit. There lies your best

friend and adviser, an advance champion of your cause, a martyred

witness to the greatness of the Anarchistic idea. Live, strive and act

as he! Anarchists, in your name I lay the well-earned laurel-wreath

upon his grave....

The retribution for the annihilation of Reinsdorf came rapidly.

Scarcely had the sentence been spoken, and before it had been

executed, the dagger of a Nemesis had already taken revenge. On

January 13, 1885, the head of the German detective forces, the

miserable Rumpff, was stabbed to death by the hand of an Anarchist.

“_Sic semper tyrannis_—So be it to all tyrants!” was heard

everywhere. With great satisfaction every honorable man, especially

every man of work, experienced that Rumpff had to die because he was

the cause of Reinsdorf’s death....

The combustibles are heaped up. Proletarians, throw the igniting spark

amongst them.

Up with force! Let the Social Resolution live!

The revolutionists of Chicago appear more careful about exposing

themselves to danger than their foreign co-conspirators, and, while

counseling bloodshed, suggest ways of bringing about destruction with a

minimum of danger. In the _Arbeiter-Zeitung_ of March 16, 1885, there

appeared the following editorial, suggesting the most effective way of

using dynamite:

In all revolutionary action three different epochs of time are to

be distinguished: First the portion of preparation for an action,

then the moment of the action itself, and finally that portion of

time which follows the deed. All these portions of time are to be

considered one after another.

In the first place, a revolutionary action should succeed. Then as

little as possible ought to be sacrificed,—that is, in other words,

the danger of discovery ought to be weakened as much as possible, and,

if it can be, should be reduced to naught. This calls for one of the

most important tactical principles, which briefly might be formulated

in the words: Saving of the combatants. All this constrains us to

further explain the measures of organization and tactics which must be

taken into consideration in such an action.

Mention was made of the danger of discovery. That is, in fact, present

in all three of the periods of conflict. This danger is imminent

in the preparation of the action itself, and finally, after the

completion thereof. The question is now, How can it be met?

If we view the different phases of the development of a deed, we have,

first, the time of preparation.

It is easily comprehensible for everybody that the danger of discovery

is the greater the more numerous the mass of people or the group is

which contemplates a deed, and _vice versa_. On the other hand, the

threatening danger approaches the closer the better the acting persons

are known to the authorities of the place of action, and _vice versa_.

Holding fast to this, the following results:

In the commission of a deed, a comrade who does not live at the

place of action—that is, a comrade of some other place—ought, if

possibility admits, to participate in the action; or, formulated

differently, a revolutionary deed ought to be enacted where one is not

known.

A further conclusion which may be drawn from what was mentioned is

this:

Whoever is willing to execute a deed has, in the first place, to put

the question to himself, whether he is able, or not, to carry out

the action by himself. If the former is the case, let him absolutely

initiate no one into the matter and let him act alone; but if that is

not the case, then let him look, with the greatest care, for just so

many fellows as he must have, absolutely—not one more nor less; with

these let him unite himself into a fighting group.

The founding of special groups of action or of war is an absolute

necessity. If it were attempted to make use of an existing group to

effect an action, discovery of the deed would follow upon its heels,

if it came to a revolutionary action at all, which would be very

doubtful. It is especially true in America, where reaction has velvet

paws, and where asinine confidence is, from a certain direction,

directly without bounds. In the preparation, even, endless debates

would develop; the thing would be hung upon the big bell; it would

be at first a public secret, and then, after the thing was known to

everybody, it would also reach the long ears of the holy Hermandad

(the sacred precinct of the watchman over the public safety), which,

as is known to every man, woman and child, hear the grass grow and the

fleas cough.

In the formation of a group of action, the greatest care must be

exercised. Men must be selected who have head and heart in the right

spot.

Has the formation of a fighting group been effected, has the intention

been developed, does each one see perfectly clear the manner of

the execution, then action must follow with the greatest possible

swiftness, without delay, for now they move within the scope of the

greatest danger, simply from the very adjacent reason, because the

select allies might yet commit treason without exposing themselves in

so doing.

In the action itself, one must be personally at the place, to select

personally that point of the place of action, and that part of the

action, which are the most important and are coupled with the greatest

danger, upon which depend chiefly the success or failure of the whole

affair.

Has the deed been completed, then the group of action dissolves at

once, without further parley, according to an understanding which must

be had beforehand, leaves the place of action, and scatters in all

directions.

If this theory is acted upon, then the danger of discovery is

extremely small—yea, reduced to almost nothing, and from this point

of view the author ventures to say, thus, and not otherwise, must be

acted, if the advance is to be proper.

It would be an easy matter to furnish the proof, by the different

revolutionary acts in which the history of the immediate past is so

rich, that the executors sinned against the one or the other of the

aforementioned principles, and that in this fact lies the cause of

the discovery, and the loss to us of very important fellow-champions

connected therewith; but we will be brief, and leave that to the

individual reflection of the reader. But one fact is established—that

is this: That all the rules mentioned can be observed without great

difficulty; further, that the blood of our best comrades can be spared

thereby; finally, as a consequence of the last-mentioned, that light

actions can be increased materially, for the complete success of an

action is the best impulse to a new deed, and the things must always

succeed when the rules of wisdom are followed.

A further question which might probably be raised would be this: In

case a special or conditional group must be formed for the purpose

of action, what is the duty, in that case, of the public groups, or

the entire public organization, in view of the aforesaid action? The

answer is very near at hand. In the first place, they have to serve

as a covering—as a shield behind which one of the most effective

weapons of revolution is bared; then these permanent groups are to

be the source from which the necessary pecuniary means are drawn and

fellow-combatants are recruited; finally, the accomplished deeds are

to furnish to permanent groups the material for critical illustration.

These discussions are to wake the spirit of rebellion,—that important

lever of the advancing course of the development of our race,—without

which we would be forever nailed down to the state of development of

a gorilla or an orang-outang. This right spirit is to be inflamed,

the revolutionary instinct is to be roused which still sleeps in the

breast of man, although these monsters, which, by an oversight of

nature, were covered with human skin, are earnestly endeavoring to

cripple the truly noble and elevated form of man by the pressure of

a thousand and again a thousand years—to morally castrate the human

race. Finally, the means and form of conquest are to be found by

untiring search and comparison, which enhance the strength of each

proletarian a thousandfold, and make him the giant Briareus, alone

able to crush the ogres of Capital.

I have thus shown the manner and methods by which Socialism seeks to

gain a foothold in America. In their declarations of principles and

encouragements to violence, these agitators have proved themselves

traitors to their country or the country of their adoption, and

ingrates to society. They have sought, and are seeking, to establish

“Anarchy in the midst of the state, war in times of peace, and

conspiracy in open day.” They are the “Huns and Vandals of modern

civilization.”

As De Tocqueville says: “Democracy and Socialism are the antipodes

of each other. While Democracy extends the sphere of individual

independence, Socialism contracts it. Democracy develops a man’s

whole manhood; Socialism makes him an agent, an instrument, a cipher.

Democracy and Socialism harmonize on one point only—the equality which

they introduce. But mark the difference: Democracy seeks equality in

liberty, while Socialism seeks it in servitude and constraint.”