💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › frank-kitz-the-paris-congress.gmi captured on 2023-01-30 at 01:33:18. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Title: The Paris Congress
Author: Frank Kitz
Date: August 10, 1889
Language: en
Topics: Paris, congress, second international, socialism, Commonweal
Source: Retrieved on 30th August 2021 from https://www.marxists.org/archive/kitz/congress.htm
Notes: Published in Commonweal.

Frank Kitz

The Paris Congress

The first proceeding after the verification of credentials was the

calling over the list of delegates, most of whom answered the roll in

French, German, and English. The only incident worthy of mention during

this tedious process was the applause with which the names of Peter

Lavroff (Russia), Cipriani (Italy), and that of Dr. Adler the Austrian

delegate (now sentenced to four months’ imprisonment, to be undergone

upon his return), and the Danish delegation, were greeted. These last

had been sent at the last moment, the Danish Social-Democrats having

altered their previous intention not to participate in the Congress.

Several fresh adhesions during the sittings brought up the total of

delegates to 407. The English representation, consisting of 21 at the

outset of the business, was increased to 24 by the arrival of J. and R.

Turner and F. Charles subsequently. The proportions of the English

delegation from the Socialist League were : Council of two delegates ;

and branches nine in all. It is worthy of remark that Greece, Norway,

Bulgaria, Roumania, Finland, Portugal, and the Czechs were represented.

Scotland may properly be said to have been represented by Messrs. Keir

Hardie, Ayrshire Miners ; Ogilvy, Scottish Labour Association;

Cunninghame Graham and Halliday. These, in conjunction with our comrade

Wess of the Berner Street Club, were the other elements in the

delegation from Britain.

The best part of two days was wasted in a useless discussion promoted by

the Italian and Flemish delegates in favour of a fusion with the other

Congress, which ended as described in my fellow-delegate’s (Morris’s)

report. The reports of various nations and trades consumed the time

until Saturday morning, when the proposals in favour of international

legislation, eight hours per day, regulation and inspection of

factories, and other “ stepping stones “ were brought forward. The

League delegates held a special meeting to discuss their attitude

towards these proposals, and as there was a diversity of opinion as to

the course we should pursue, it was left to the discretion of each

delegate to vote as he pleased.

The position occupied by myself, and some others of the delegates, in

regard to the question of seeking the aid of Parliament for the

reduction of the hours of labour, was that it should be achieved by

strikes, combination, and by custom, for the reasons given in Merlino’s

amendment : —

“Considering that it is dangerous to foster amongst the masses the great

superstition of the century, which consists in pretending to solve the

great social problems by the ballot box and Acts of Parliament ; that it

is on the contrary necessary to undermine and destroy the fetishes of

legislation and legislators ; and that the offer of labour legislation

officially made by the governments has only one aim, that of

rehabilitating in the eyes of the masses Parliamentarism, now becoming

utterly discredited, and to prolong its agonising life.”

The reading of the reports occupied several hours, during which it was

necessary to sit in a cramped position and listen to them in French and

German before the English translation was reached. This made it a

wearisome task, the irksomeness of which was increased by the several

presidents and prominent members of the bureau, who took little or no

trouble to secure order for the English translations. Many valuable

portions of the reports and names of the speakers in several cases were

inaudible to me on this account. Mrs. Aveling laboured hard and

conscientiously at a very hard task, but had to solicit the aid of your

delegates’ lungs to assist her in obtaining anything like silence for

her explanations. I must say, as against the French character for

courtesy, that the local Parisian delegates were as a group the most

discourteous in this particular, and were several times rebuked from the

platform for it.

The portions of reports which I think most noteworthy are those of the

Parisian Waiters, French Seamen, German Westphalian Miners, Berlin Women

Workers, Swedish, Danish, and Austrian delegates. Comrade Clara Zetkin,

of the Berlin Women Workers, roused the Congress to enthusiasm when she

said that the capitalist had destroyed women’s place at home and forced

her into the market as a producer, only to widen her ideas and create

another enemy who would strive with energy for the overthrow of

capitalist domination. She said that little thanks were due to the men

for women’s awakening, for they have held that women’s place was at home

as a domestic slave. The women would never return to that condition ;

but, in opposition to the middle-class agitation for so-called Women’s

Rights, which simply means to put women in antagonism to men and use

them as competitors in the wage-market against them, they women

Socialists, disregarding the question of sex in economics, would work

with men on a basis of equality for the social revolution.

Dr. Adler, Austria, in giving his report, stated that in Austria labour

legislation was theoretically perfect. Regulation of factories and of

child and female labour existed on paper, yet men, women, and children

are overworked and the laws disregarded. In a speech full of satire he

ridiculed this state of things, and said that for his participation in

the tram strike of Vienna his paper, the Gleichheit, was suppressed and

himself condemned to prison ; that in all Austria there are only fifteen

inspectors to see to the enforcement of labour laws.

The delegate of the Parisian Waiters’ stated that they had to work from

7 a.m. to 2 p.m., and often longer ; that they often had to pay the

managers of the Bureau de Placement, or place farmers, 60 ft. to 100 fr.

to secure a place, and then were frequently dismissed upon the smallest

pretence, the employer and the bureau sharing in the plunder of the

guarantee. They were obliged to be civil to all, and even when insulted

to say “ Thank you.” Hitherto they had been counted as of no moment, but

now that they are organised every other section of industry recognised

them. They were heartily in sympathy with Socialism.

The delegate of the German Miners’ recited how the miners had been

treated by the authorities in their late revolt, and how many had been

imprisoned for simply organising ; of their interview with the German

Emperor, whom, by the way, he designated “the devil”; and said, in

conclusion, that the upheaval had been made without Socialist influence

against intolerable conditions, but henceforward the miners would work

with socialistic aims.

Sweden was obliged to seek a Swede resident in Paris as her

representative, because just now there are four editors of Socialist

papers in prison, and exceptional laws on the German and Austrian

pattern are being passed against the Socialists.

Bohemian Socialists were also under the same difficulties ; no

combination was allowed, and just recently in one year 340 persons were

arrested on suspicion, some condemned to one year of imprisonment for a

paper that had ceased to exist, some to three or four months, and only

110 acquitted after being detained weeks without trial.

The delegate of the French Seamen detailed the hardships his

constituents underwent, tied up by the hands to the rigging or placed in

dark cells, and overworked and half starved. He appealed to the Congress

for its sympathy and aid on their behalf.

Christensen, of Denmark, gave his report, and spoke of the rapid strides

the movement was making in that country, and of the persecutions to

which the Socialists were subjected.

Ferroul (Deputy) asked to be allowed to speak, and having obtained

permission he delivered a powerful speech against Parliamentarianism.

The English report was given upon anti-Parliamentary lines by comrade

Morris, and after a deal of pressure had been exercised upon the

bureau.[1]

Keir Hardie gave us a trades’ union report, at the conclusion of which

he went out of his way to declare that no person in England believed in

other than peaceful methods to achieve amelioration of conditions, a

statement that was protested against by myself and other delegates.

Hardie’s speech was carefully, very carefully, translated into German by

Liebknecht, who in the course of it added oomments of his own to

demonstrate the difference between Morris and Keir Hardie.[2]

The subsequent sittings of the Congress were devoted to the factory

legislation before mentioned, and a resolution sent in on behalf of the

League by Morris was added, I believe, to the preamble of the first

resolution.

I then essayed my prentice hand in the belief that the wreckage caused

by competition deserve as much attention as the organised workers, and

therefore sent in the following resolution : —

“ The Congress recognising that the monopoly of the means of life, viz.,

land and instruments of production, by landlords and capitalists is the

cause of poverty and degradation amongst the masses, and seeing that the

mass of unemployed caused by monopoly have only the choice of either

starvation wages, brutal charity, theft, or rebellion, we view with

disgust and horror the hypocrisy which establishes a code of morality

and honesty, buttressed by religion, and yet condemns multitudes to

pauperism, prostitution, and crime ; the Congress having for its aim and

object the extinction of poverty by the abolition of monopoly, declares

that the monopolists who enforce judicially penal law are themselves the

greatest criminals, and whilst extending our sympathy to prisoner,

prostitute, and pauper, made so by injustice, we strengthen our resolve

to overthrow at the earliest moment the fraud called Modern Society.”

Considerable trouble had to be taken to get it read to the Congress,

after which it was, I believe, consigned to limbo. No attempt was made

to translate it for the convenience of the delegates, nor put it upon

the order of the day.

In conclusion, I must say that the Congress was disappointing from a

revolutionary standpoint, badly organised, and little more than a

prelude to the Governmental one about to be held upon labour

legislation. Discussion upon the anti-Parliamentary and Anarchical

positions was barely tolerated, and ultimately, forcibly suppressed. Let

me say that as a demonstration of Internationalism broadly, and not

noticing details, the Congress was a success ; but my advice to English

Socialists Is, in view of a convocation to another one to be held in the

future, to insist upon organisation, such as the printing of the order

of the day, proper translations, and above all, sound revolutionary

doctrines in favour of all and not sections of the proletariat.

[1] A note appeared in the September 14 issue of Commonweal as follows:

We have received the first part of the official edition of the

proceedings of the International (Marxist) Congress (23 pp., Imprimerie

de la Resse, 1889), containing the appeal of the organising committee,

the list of delegates, and a number of resolutions passed. Very little

care has been taken, to make this publication a reliable historical

document, for the lists of delegates swarm with misprints, omissions,

and inconsequent arrangings. Two of the English delegates, F. Charles

and J. Turner, are completely omitted ; on the other side we find an

Austrian delegate, Mr. Altrohlan, who never existed, but the name of the

town of Altrohlau, where H. Dietel came from, was made the name of a

delegate ! William Morris’s and F. Kitz’s resolutions were not published

as “ no space was left,” it is said, but will be published “ later on.”

[2] Leibknecht’s reply was published in the next issue of Commonweal as

follows:

Sir, — In your number of the 10^(th) of this month, Mr. F. Kitz pays me

the compliment of having “carefully, very carefully translated into

German Keir Hardie’s speech.” Mr. Kitz is right. I did it “carefully,

very carefully,” as I am always wont to do my duty. Since Mr. Kitz has

omitted to mention it, I may add that I have translated Mr. Morris’s

speech with exactly the same care and love ; and if Mr. Kitz had made a

speech as interesting and as instructive as those of his two countrymen,

I should have rendered him the same service. — Truly yours, W.

Liebknecht.

Borsdorf, near Leipzig, August 11.