Edward Aveling (1892)
Source: Pall Mall Gazette, 11 October 1892, pp. 1-2
Also published: The Workman's Times, October 15 1892 (with title 'The Proposed Eight Hours Congress-Boycott by Foreign Workers')
Transcription: by Graham Seaman for MIA, March 2021.
THE action of the British Trades Union Congress at Glasgow upon the International Eight Hours Congress is already bearing fruit. But the fruit is quite other than that expected by the “Old” Trades Union majority. The question itself is so serious, the difficulty in which the English trades unions have landed themselves by their resolution at Glasgow is also so serious, and the position already taken up by the representative working-class organizations of the Continent is so distinctly in opposition to what the English majority wish, that very interesting complications threaten. It may be well, therefore, to state briefly the position of affairs.
In 1891 an International Workers' Congress met at Brussels. That Congress, attended by representatives of practically all the European nationalities – England included – delegated to the Swiss the task of making arrangements and issuing invitations for the next International Congress to be held at Zürich in 1893. In pursuance of their instructions the Swiss committee sent a letter to the British trades union meeting at Glasgow, inviting through the Congress all the trades unions to the forthcoming Congress at Zürich. It is important to note that this letter was not addressed, as has been stated, to the Parliamentary Committee, but to the Congress. In the ordinary course of events the letter came into the hands of Mr. Fenwick, as secretary of the Parliamentary Committee. And in the ordinary course of events it would have in all probability remained there. But the ordinary course of events was interfered with by the persistent action of some of the “New” Unionists, and notably of Will Thorne, the general secretary of the Gas-workers’ and General Labourers’ Union. In season and out of season, Thorne was asking for the Zürich letter. For a long while nothing was known of it. But Thorne was not to be beaten. He stuck to his post, like Banquo‘s ghost at Macbeth‘s feast, until one expected Mr. Hodge, the president of the Congress, to cry in a suitable Scotch accent, “Avaunt and quit my sight. Let the earth hide thee!” After much speaking the letter was at length unearthed. On this wise. Mr. Matkin, of Liverpool, brought forward a motion in favour of an International Congress to discuss the legal eight hours question. That led to an amendment to the effect that the International Congress at Zürich should be attended, and that led ultimately to the letter of invitation. On a division there were 97 votes only in favour of the amendment, and 189 against it. And the letter of invitation was not answered or even so much as acknowledged by the Congress. To the lookers-on, who sometimes see the most of the game, it appeared likely that this action, both negative and positive, of the Glasgow Congress would be resented by the other nations. And that which then appeared likely has now been realized.
In spite of the carrying of Mr. Matkin's resolution, it still remains to be seen if this is synonymous with the carrying out of it. One thing is quite certain, that, even if it is carried out, working-class delegates from the Continental countries are not likely to attend such a Congress.
And for this conclusion here is the evidence. The first National Congresses that assembled after the Glasgow one were those in France. At the Marseilles Congress of the “Parti Ouvrier” a resolution was unanimously passed blaming “the anti-Socialist majority of Glasgow for trying to sow division in the ranks of the party of Labour by organizing the London Congress” and inviting “the trades unions to rally to the International workers' movement, and to send representatives to the Zürich Congress.” The significance of this resolution will be better understood by those who remember that 345 French trades unions, including the Bourses du Travail of Paris and many other towns, were represented at the Congress, and that among the delegates were six deputies to the French Chamber, five mayors, and sixteen municipal and twelve general councillors. Further, as far as France is concerned, at the Congress of Trade Unions alone, also held at Marseilles within a day or two of the more general Congress, a similar resolution was passed.
As for Germany, the National Congress of the Social Democratic party, which represents all the organized workers of the country, does not take place till November. The cholera is answerable for, amongst other things, the postponement of the Congress, which was to have taken place on1 the 12th of this month. When it does come off, there can be little doubt that a resolution similar to that of the French will be passed. The grounds for this want of doubt are the official statement in the Berlin Vorwärts – the official organ of the party – and the very important article by August Bebel which appears in the Neue Zeit. The Vorwärts, in its front page aid largest type, publishes in full the French resolution under the heading, “A Declaration against the Resolution of the recent Trades Union Congress in respect to an Eight Hours Conference.” The article begins “As is well known, the Trades Union Congress at Glasgow passed a resolution to immediately summon a Congress of Trades Unions to discuss the international bringing about of the Eight Hours working day. This resolution was forced through by the leaders of the old Trades Unions in order to prevent the English unions from being represented at the International Congress of 1893 at Zurich, and so to preserve them from the danger of being infected with the poison of Socialism.” Towards the end of the article the Vorwärts writes in italics, after quoting the French resolution: “It is now essential that this action of our French brethren shall he supported by the German Social Democrats and Trades Unions, and also by the Labour parties and Labour organizations of other countries.”
From Bebel's article, which, from its clearness and outspokenness, is of the utmost importance to the foes as well as the friends of Socialism, we quote the following significant passages. After referring to the Glasgow resolution, he says that, if it were carried out, “the world will see the spectacle of an International Trades Union Congress being summoned in opposition to a general International Congress of Workers, specially to consider a question which belongs to the latter at least as much as to the former – a question as to the consideration of which the latter (i.e. the Zurich Congress) has certainly the right of priority. Such a resolution as that of Glasgow is, so to say, a slap in the face to the Brussels International Workers’ Congress, which decided unanimously in favour of the calling of the Zürich 1893 Congress, and is, further, a contemptuous ignoring of the historical events which have forced the Congress at Glasgow to consider the Eight Hours question. Such a resolution is only possible in Great Britain, a country which, on account of its gigantic capitalistic development, has had until recently the command of the world-market, and in which there is now a working-class movement the majority of whose so-called leaders are still sunk in old-world prejudices, look at the world through spectacles ‘made in England,’ and with genuine British egotism wish to make the working-class movement of the rest of the world subservient to their own particular interests. And what, now, are the special grounds that led the majority of the Glasgow Congress to come to their decision? ... First and foremost the dread of Continental Socialism, which dominates the international congresses, and with which the good sheep of the trades unions are to be frightened so that they may be forewarned against the ‘wild schemes’ which Continental Socialism is to bring about. The secret of the matter is that the old trades union leaders feel that their supremacy is threatened. Socialism and the new ideas which dominate almost the whole of the working classes of the Continent, so far as they have joined any movement at all, is also taking root in the English working class movement, and is spreading further and further. As a consequence of this there is arising an independent Labour party, whose opposition to the ruling political parties of the country is becoming more and more marked, and that party must of necessity become a Socialistic one. On the other hand, the old trades union leaders, speaking generally, are in the camp of its political opponents; consequently within the trades unions they support the policy of the particular party to which they belong. Hence their uncompromising antagonism to the intervention of the State in social matters, their preaching of the harmony of interests between Capital and Labour, and their peculiarly English objection to all foreign relations, their sovereign contempt for the Continental working-class movement.” Later, August Bebel speaks out plainly as to what he considers the reasons for the Glasgow decision: “The leaders are trying by the summoning of a special Trades Union Congress to dispose of the question which at the present time most interests the English workers, to keep their members away from the infection of Socialism. The leaders of the old English trades unionism are afraid of the further spreading of Socialistic ideas in their own ranks ... That is the plain meaning of the Glasgow resolution. Hence all class-conscious workers must take up their position against this so-called International Trades Union Congress, and this can only be done by” – here the italics come in “holding aloof from the Congress summoned by the English.” Spain follows suit. The secretaries, Iglesias and Diego, of the new National Committee of the Spanish Workers’ Party, elected by the Congress of Valencia, which sat on August 26 and the following days of this year, report that at one of their earliest sittings the committee passed a resolution stating that “they had seen with profound displeasure what had been done at the Glasgow Trades Union Congress and that, while they left it to the Zürich Committee to take further steps to reply to the insult offered to the proletariat represented at the Brussels Congress, the Spanish Committee protest against the manoeuvres of the conservative elements of English trades unionism, and reaffirm the adhesion of the Spanish Socialists to the solemn resolutions of the Congresses of Brussels and Paris.”
The Italians were really in a sense first in the field. In a letter of congratulation sent to the French Workers’ Congress and signed by the committee of the Italian Workers’ Party (two compositors, one glover, one engineer, one book-keeper, one deputy to the Italian Chamber, and one woman representing a working women's organization), and countersigned by Filippo Turati, editor of the Critica Sociale, occurs the following passage:– “The Central Committee of Italy will not be able to accept the proposition of the Glasgow Trades Union Congress for a special International Congress on the Eight Hours question. This question ... will have to be discussed next year at the great International Congress at Zürich, the lineal descendant of the International Workers’ Congresses of Paris and Brussels. There will only be a weakening of forces if there is any interference with this International Court of Appeal which the Congress of Brussels has founded with the approval of the delegates of the trades unions themselves. In our opinion it would perhaps be useful if your Congress were to pass a resolution in this sense.”
As to Austria, in referring to the Marseilles Congress, the Arbeiter-Zeitung, of Vienna–the official organ of the Austrian Socialists–says: “The second resolution is especially important, and makes quite clear the attitude of our French comrades with regard to the reactionary British trades unions, and the separate Congress planned by them. The Old Unionists will soon be forced to admit that the time is past when they had the leadership of the workers, and will probably find themselves at their Congress – alone.
From all of which it will be seen that if the British trades unionists decide to carry out their resolution to have a little International Congress of their own they are likely to find themselves in a pretty international kettle of fish.