Syndicalism in France Part 3

CHAPTER II

ORIGIN OF THE GENERAL CONFEDERATION OF LABOR (1872-1895)

The vigorous suppression of the Commune and the political events which followed it threw the French workingmen for some time into a state of mental depression. Though trade-union meetings were not prohibited, the workingmen avoided the places which had been centers of syndical activity before the Commune. Full of suspicion and fear, they preferred to remain in isolation rather than to risk the persecution of the government.

Under these conditions, the initiative in reconst.i.tuting the syndicats was taken by a republican journalist, Barberet.[41] Barberet was prompted to undertake this "honorable task" by the desire to do away with strikes. He had observed the strike movement for some years, and had come to the conclusion that strikes were fatal to the workingmen and dangerous to the political inst.i.tutions of the country. His observations had convinced him that the Second Empire had fallen largely in consequence of the strike movement during 1868-70, and he was anxious to preserve the Republic from similar troubles. As he expressed it, strikes were "a crime of _lese-democratie_"[42] which it was necessary to prevent by all means.

[41] Barberet was afterwards appointed chief of the Bureau of Trade Unions, which was const.i.tuted as part of the Dept. of the Interior.

[42] J. Barberet, _Monographies Professionelles_ (Paris, 1886), vol. i, p. 16.

Barberet outlined the following program for the syndicats. They were to watch over the loyal fulfilment of contracts of apprentices.h.i.+p; to organize employment bureaus; to create boards of conciliation composed of an equal number of delegates from employers and from workingmen for the peaceful solution of trade disputes; to found libraries and courses in technical education; to utilize their funds not to "foment strikes", but to buy raw materials and instruments of labor; and finally, "to crown these various preparatory steps" by the creation of co-operative workshops "which alone would give groups of workingmen the normal access to industry and to commerce" and which would in time equalize wealth.[43]

[43] Barberet, _op. cit._, pp. 20-25.

Under Barberet's influence and with his a.s.sistance syndicats were reconst.i.tuted in a few trades in Paris during 1872. These syndicats felt the necessity of uniting into a larger body, and in August of the same year they founded the _Cercle de l'Union Ouvriere_, which was to form a counter-balance to the employers' organization _L'Union Nationale du Commerce et de l'Industrie_. The _Cercle_ insisted on its peaceful intentions; it declared that its aim was "to realize concord and justice through study" and to convince public opinion "of the moderation with which the workingmen claim their rights."[44] The _Cercle_ was nevertheless dissolved by the government.

[44] Fernand Pelloutier, _Histoire des Bourses du Travail_ (Paris, 1902), p. 35.

The syndicats, however, were left alone. They slowly increased in numbers and spread to new trades. There were about 135 in Paris in 1875.

Following the example of the syndicats of the Second Empire, they organized delegations of workingmen to the Exhibitions of Vienna in 1873 and of Philadelphia in 1876. But their supreme effort was the organization of the first French Labor Congress in Paris in 1876.

The Congress was attended by 255 delegates from Paris and 105 from the provincial towns. The delegates represented syndicats, co-operative societies and mutual aid societies. The program of the Congress included eight subjects: (1) The work of women; (2) syndical chambers; (3) councils of _prud'hommes_; (4) apprentices.h.i.+p and technical education; (5) direct representation of the working cla.s.s in Parliament; (6) co-operative a.s.sociations of production, of consumption and of credit; (7) old-age pensions; (8) agricultural a.s.sociations and the relations between agricultural and industrial workers.

The proceedings of the Congress were calm and moderate. The organizers of the Congress were anxious not to arouse the apprehension of the government and not to compromise the republicans with whose help the Congress was organized. The reports and the discussions of the Congress showed that the syndical program outlined by Barberet was accepted by almost all the delegates. They insisted upon the necessity of solving peaceably all industrial difficulties, expressed antipathy for the strike and above all affirmed their belief in the emanc.i.p.ating efficacy of co-operation. At the same time they repudiated socialism, which one of the delegates proclaimed "a bourgeois Utopia".[45]

[45] _Seances du Congres Ouvrier de France_, Session de 1876, p. 43.

The syndicats held a second congress in 1876 in Lyons. The Congress of Lyons considered the same questions as did that of Paris, and gave them the same solutions. In general, the character of the second congress was like that of the first.

The third Labor Congress held in Ma.r.s.eilles in 1879, was a new departure in the history of the French labor movement. It marked the end of the influence of Barberet and of the "co-operators" and the beginning of socialist influence. The Congress of Ma.r.s.eilles accepted the t.i.tle of "Socialist Labor Congress", expressed itself in favor of the collective appropriation of the means of production and adopted a resolution to organize a workingmen's social political party.

This change in views was brought about by a concurrence of many circ.u.mstances. The moderate character of the syndicats between 1872-1879 had been due in large measure to the political conditions of France. The cause of the Republic was in danger and the workingmen were cautious not to increase its difficulties. But after the elections of 1876 and 1877 and upon the election of Grevy to the Presidency, the Republic was more or less securely established, and the workingmen thought that they should now be more outspoken in their economic demands. The Committee which had organized the Congress of Paris had formulated these sentiments in the following terms: "From the moment that the republican form of government was secured", wrote the Committee, "it was indispensable for the working-cla.s.s, who up to that time had gone hand in hand with the republican bourgeoisie, to affirm their own interests and to seek the means which would permit them to transform their economic condition."[46] It was believed that the means to accomplish this task was co-operation. The belief in co-operation was so intense and general at that time that one of the delegates to the Congress of Paris, M. Finance,[47] himself an opponent of co-operation, predicted a large co-operative movement similar to the movements of 1848-50 and 1864-67. The prediction did not come true. Nothing important was accomplished in this field, and the hopes in co-operation receded before the impossibility of putting the idea into practice. The critics and opponents of co-operation did the rest to discredit the idea. But when the idea of co-operation lost its influence over the syndicats, the ground was cleared for socialism. The Congress of Lyons had declared that "the syndicats must not forget that the wage-system is but a transitory stage from serfdom to an unnamed state."[48] When the hope that this unnamed state would be brought about by co-operation was gone, the "unnamed" state obtained a name, for the Socialists alone held out to the workingmen the promise of a new state which would take the place of the wage system.

[46] _Seances du Congres Ouvrier_, 1876 (Paris, 1877), p. 9.

[47] Afterward one of the active members of the _Office du Travail_.

[48] _a.s.soc. Profess._, vol. i, p. 243.

On ground thus prepared the Socialists came to sow their seed. A group of collectivists, inspired by the ideas of the "International", had existed in Paris since 1873.[49] But this group began to attract attention only in 1877 when it found a leader in Jules Guesde. Jules Guesde is a remarkable figure in the history of French Socialism and has played a great part in shaping the movement. He had edited a paper, _Les Droits de l'Homme_, in Montpelier in 1870-1 and had expressed his sympathy for the Commune. This cost him a sentence of five years in prison. He preferred exile, went to Switzerland, there came into contact with the "International" and was influenced by Marxian ideas.

[49] Terrail-Mermeix, _La France Socialiste_ (Paris, 1886), p. 51.

On his return to France, Jules Guesde became the spokesman and propagandist of Marxian or "scientific socialism". Fanatical, vigorous, domineering, he soon made himself the leader of the French collectivists. Towards the end of 1877, he founded a weekly, _L'egalite_, the first number of which outlined the program which the paper intended to defend. "We believe," wrote _L'egalite_, "with the collectivist school to which almost all serious minds of the working-cla.s.s of both hemispheres now belong, that the natural and scientific evolution of mankind leads it irresistibly to the collective appropriation of the soil and of the instruments of labor." In order to achieve this end, _L'egalite_ declared it necessary for the proletariat to const.i.tute itself a distinct political party which should pursue the aim of conquering the political power of the State.[50]

[50] _L'egalite_, 18 Nov., 1877.

The collectivists found a few adherents among the workingmen who actively propagated the new ideas. In 1878, several syndicats of Paris: those of the machinists, joiners, tailors, leather dressers and others, accepted the collectivist program.

The collectivist ideas were given wider publicity and influence by the persecution of the government. In 1878, an international congress of workingmen was to be held in Paris during the International Exhibition.

The Congress of Lyons (1878) had appointed a special committee to organize this international congress. Arrangements were being made for the congress, when the government prohibited it.

The more moderate elements of the Committee gave way before the prohibition of the government, but Guesde and his followers accepted the challenge of the government and continued the preparations for the Congress. The government dispersed the Congress at its very first session and inst.i.tuted legal proceedings against Guesde and other delegates.

The trial made a sensation and widely circulated the ideas which Guesde defended before the tribunal. From the prison where they were incarcerated the collectivists launched an appeal "to the proletarians, peasant proprietors and small masters" which contained an exposition of collectivist principles and proposed the formation of a distinct political party. The appeal gained many adherents from various parts of France.[51]

[51] Terrail-Mermeix, _op. cit._, p. 98.

The idea of having workingmen's representatives in Parliament had already come up at the Congress of Paris (1876). This Congress, as indicated above, had on its program the question of the "Representation of the Proletariat in Parliament." The reports on this question read at the Congress were extremely interesting. The "moderate co-operators" and "Barberetists", as they were nicknamed by the revolutionary collectivists, insisted in these reports upon the separation which existed between bourgeois and workingmen, upon the inability of the former to understand the interests and the aspirations of the latter, and upon the consequent necessity of having workingmen's representatives in Parliament. These reports revealed the deep-seated sentiments of the workingmen which made it possible for the ideas of cla.s.s and cla.s.s struggle to spread among them.

The Congress of Lyons (1878) had advanced the question a step further.

It had adopted a resolution that journals should be created which should support workingmen-candidates only.

With all this ground prepared, the triumph of the Socialists at the Congress of Ma.r.s.eilles (1879) was not so sudden as some have thought it to be. The influences which had brought about this change in sentiment were clearly outlined by the Committee on Organization, as may be seen from the following extract:

From the contact of workingmen-delegates from all civilized nations that had appointed a rendezvous at the International Exhibition, a clearly revolutionary idea disentangled itself.... When the International Congress was brutally dispersed by the government, one thing was proven: the working cla.s.s had no longer to expect its salvation from anybody but itself.... The suspicions of the government with regard to the organizers of the Congress, the iniquitous proceedings which it inst.i.tuted against them, have led to the revolutionary resolutions of the Congress which show that the French proletariat is self-conscious and is worthy of emanc.i.p.ation.[52]

[52] Leon Blum, _Les Congres Ouvriers et Socialistes Francais_ (Paris, 1901), pp. 33-4.

To a similar conclusion had come the Committee on Resolutions appointed by the Congress of Lyons. In the intervals between the two Congresses, it had a conference with the deputies of the Department of Rhone and could report only failure. The deputies, one of whom belonged to the Extreme Left, were against the limitation of hours of work in the name of liberty, and against the liberty of a.s.sociation in the name of the superior rights of the State. "The remedy to this state of affairs,"

concluded the Committee, "is to create in France a workingmen's party such as exists already in several neighboring states."[53]

[53] _Ibid._, p. 36.

The Congress of Ma.r.s.eilles carried out the task which the collectivists a.s.signed to it. A resolution was adopted declaring that the co-operative societies could by no means be considered a sufficiently powerful means for accomplis.h.i.+ng the emanc.i.p.ation of the proletariat. Another declared the aim of the Congress to be: "The collectivity of soil and of subsoil, of instruments of labor, of raw materials--to be given to all and to be rendered inalienable by society to whom they must be returned."[54]

This resolution was adopted by 73 votes against 23.

[54] Leon de Seilhac, _Les Congres Ouvriers en France_ (Paris, 1899), p.

47.

The Congress also const.i.tuted itself a distinct party under the name of the "Federation of Socialist Workingmen of France". The party was organized on a federalist principle. France was divided into six regions: (1) Center or Paris; (2) East or Lyons; (3) Ma.r.s.eilles or South; (4) Bordeaux or West; (5) North or Lille; (6) Algeria. Each region was to have its regional committee and regional congress and be autonomous in its administration. A general committee was to be appointed by the Congress of the Federation, to be held annually in each of the princ.i.p.al regional towns in turn.

After the Congress of Ma.r.s.eilles (1879) the leaders.h.i.+p of the syndical movement pa.s.sed to the Socialists. This led to a split at the next Congress held in Havre in 1880. The "moderates" and "co-operators"

separated from the revolutionary collectivists. The former grouped themselves about _L'Union des Chambres Syndicales Ouvrieres de France_.

They held two separate congresses of their own in 1881 and 1882, which attracted little attention and were of no importance. The _Union des Chambres Syndicales_ confined itself to obtaining a reform of the law on syndicats.

The Collectivists themselves, however, were not long united. The movement was soon disrupted by internal divisions and factions. At the Congress of Ma.r.s.eilles (1879) the triumph of collectivism was a.s.sured by elements which had the principles of collectivism in common, but which differed in other points. In Havre (1880) these elements were still united against the "moderate" elements. But after the Congress of Havre they separated more and more into distinct and warring groups.

The first differentiation took place between the parliamentary socialists on the one hand, and the communist-anarchists on the other.

Both divisions had a common aim; the collective appropriation of the means of production. They did not differ much in their ideas on distribution; there were communists among the parliamentary socialists.

What separated them most was difference in method. The anarchists rejected the idea that the State, which in their view was and always had been an instrument of exploitation, could ever become an instrument of emanc.i.p.ation, even in the hands of a socialist government. The first act in the Social Revolution, in their opinion, had to be the destruction of the State. With this aim in view, the anarchists wished to have nothing to do with parliamentary politics. They denounced parliamentary action as a "pell-mell of compromise, of corruption, of charlatanism and of absurdities, which does no constructive work, while it destroys character and kills the revolutionary spirit by holding the ma.s.ses under a fatal illusion."[55] The anarchists saw only one way of bringing about the emanc.i.p.ation of the working-cla.s.s; namely, to carry on an active propaganda and agitation, to organize groups, and at an opportune moment to raise the people in revolt against the State and the propertied cla.s.ses; then destroy the State, expropriate the capitalist cla.s.s and reorganize society on communist and federalist principles. This was the Social Revolution they preached.[56]

[55] _Pourquoi Guesde n'est-il pas anarchiste?_ p. 6.

[56] On the anarchist theory, the works of Bakounin, Kropotkin, Reclus and J. Grave should be consulted; on anarchism in France see Dubois, _Le Peril anarchiste_; Garin, _l'Anarchie_; also various periodicals, particularly, _Le Revolte_ and _Les Temps Nouveaux_.

From 1883 onward the anarchist propaganda met with success in various parts of France, particularly in Paris and in the South. There were thousands of workingmen who professed the anarchist ideas, and the success of the anarchists was quite disquieting to the socialists.[57]