Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

Die Vernon, she may be superficially manly in her independence and promptitude of action, can never tolerate the affectations of the mannish school. The large human side of a womanly woman is a far better security against doing what is against her natural sympathies, than any womanish timidity.

For example, we hold that while true womanliness is never aggressive, it is often much more courageous than even true manliness in getting over that fastidiousness and disgust which so often hamper the natural activity of sympathetic natures. Women are, and with their constitution no doubt ought to be, much more courageous in confronting and overcoming this natural fastidiousness and over-refinement, than men. But they are, and we also think ought to be, much less disposed to overcome it in the interest of aggressive sports like the chase, which, instead of appealing to pure humanity, appeal only to that instinct which is inherited by the male sex from their hunting ancestors who delighted in combat and danger for its own sake, and not merely for the sake of the living it gained for them. It is not womanly to be eager on a fine day "to go out and kill something" though no one can say that the chase has (hitherto at least) ceased to be regarded as a thoroughly manly amusement. But woman's very natural and right shrinking from the more aggressive delights of man, does not

imply any similar shrinking from those occupations in which nerve and fortitude and the power to suppress all the physical qualms which hospital-nurses, for instance, have to overcome, are tested to the utmost. In passive fortitude womanly women far surpass ordinary men, though in the courage of aggression they are usually much their inferiors. Womanliness is strong where womanishness is conspicuously feeble. As all the stronger men have much of the woman in them, though they have also the power of repressing their womanly sympathies when these interfere with their manly duties, so all the stronger women have much of true manliness in them, though they do not show it, and ought not to show it, except when their womanly instincts require them to show it. Manliness in men generally results in their concealing the depth of their sympathy with the true woman, because to give way to it would unman them for their work as men. But womanliness in women not unfrequently requires the open display of that large reserve of courage and force, which on ordinary occasions it is both natural and modest for them to conceal. The womanly woman is far nearer to the manly man, than the womanish woman; and the manliness of man brings him much closer to the nature of the woman, than his mannishness,-his parade of recklessness, combativeness, and audacity. -The Spectator.

SOCIALISM IN FRANCE: ITS PRESENT AND FUTURE.

BY YVES GUYOT, LATE MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS OF FRANCE.

I.

IF it has not been decided, even by the aid of long dissertations, whether the paternity of the word "Socialism" belongs to Robert Owen, Pierre Leroux, or Louis Reybaud, still less has any one succeeded in fixing the exact signification of that term. Proudhon, on appearing before a court of assize after the eventful days of June 1848, replied to the judge: "Socialism! That is, every aspiration toward the amelioration of society." "Then we are all

Socialists," said the judge.

"I hope so, indeed," answered Proudhon, not without irony.

Some years ago in France, every man who gave his attention to social questions was given, and accepted without protest, the title of Socialist. Much less importance was attached to it when the conquests sought were those of liberty. All the advocates of social reform asked for freedom of the press and the right of meeting. They demanded also such changes in the law of association as should not leave trades unions to the

mere tolerance or the persecution of the public authorities.

Freedom of the press and of meeting were obtained in 1881. So wide, indeed, was the liberty conceded that it lacked the indispensable counterpoise of responsibility. In 1884, instead of a general law on associations, a special law was passed on professional or trade syndicates, authorizing "the free and unlicensed establishment of associations of persons carrying on the same profession, similar trades, or connected industries co-operating in the manufacture of certain products. These syndicates must have for their exclusive object the study and defence of economic interests, manufacturing and agricultural. Their founders must deposit a copy of their rules and the names of the persons charged with their administration, at the townhall of the Department when the syndicate is established in the provinces, and at the Prefecture of the Seine when in Paris. These syndicates may form unions; but while they can possess real estate and sue or be sued in a court of law, the unions cannot. Moreover the syndicates may possess only the real estate necessary for their meetings-libraries and business offices. They may establish funds for assistance in case of ill-health, etc., and for pensions; and they may open offices at which information can be obtained on the supply of and the demand for labor. Every member of a trade syndicate can retire from it at any moment-without any other charge than the payment of his contribution for the year-while maintaining his right to remain a member of the benefit and pension societies to which he has subscribed."

This law was demanded and voted by the Republicans as a law of freedom; but they feared to pass a general law on associations, because of the religious congregations. They, therefore, gave freedom of association to trade associations only, and with the restrictions which I have just indicated. The reactionaries mistrusted this law much, though, by a singular irony, it is they who have made the greatest use of it. Pretending to the exclusive representation of agriculture, they have founded agricultural syndicates for the purchase of agricultural machines, manures, and

animals for breeding; and they have endeavored to make political capital out of these. If the agricultural syndicates have rendered service to agriculture, they have done nothing of the kind for those who sought to use them as electoral means. Employers have made use of this law to found syndicates which have chiefly been worked for Protectionist ends. As to the workmen, the Annuaire des Syndicats counts as working with the syndicates only 208,000, or about 6 per cent. of the laboring population of France, the agricultural laborers excepted. But many have not been willing to join syndicates constituted in conformity with the law, as they consider that some obligations to which they are submitted under it do violence to their freedom and dignity, and are police arrangements. More than half of the syndicates which occupied the Bourse du Travail were illegal.

As the result of my speech in the Chamber of Deputies on the 8th of May last, the Minister of the Interior, M. Charles Dupuy, took steps to compel these syndicates to conform to the law before the 5th of July. The members of the "executive commission of the committee" of the Bourse du Travail replied "to the indescribable affront which the Minister of the Interior had just inflicted on the laboring class, that the dignity, the honor of the proletariat bid it not to let pass so odious a provocation."

The syndicates affirmed by deliberate and repeated resolutions, not merely that those which were not en règle would not put themselves in accordance with the law, but that the others, “in order to recover their independence,' should cease to observe legal prescriptions.

[ocr errors]

I cite this fact more especially to show the singular conception of legality which has grown up among French Socialists. A law has been passed abrogating that of 1791 which, in order to guarantee the freedom of labor against the tricks of corporations, prohibited all associations between persons of the same profession. This law of 1884 gives them rights which they may regard as too restricted; but, instead of asking for their extension--for example, by enlarging their power of hold

ing property-they have refused to submit to the law, while at the same time they are promoting the adoption of a new law, which has been voted by the Chamber of Deputies and rejected by the Senate, and is known by the name of the deputy who has presented it as the loi Bovier-Lapierre. According to this Bill, every employer who refused to hire a workman and was so simpleminded as to declare that this refusal was based on the fact that the workman was a member of a syndicate, or who discharged a workman for the same reason, would be liable to from ten days' to a month's imprisonment and a fine of from 100 to 2,000 francs. Every employer would be under the obligation, under penalty, to accept any work man who was a member of a syndicate, and-when once this workman was domiciled with him-to regard him as immovable, whatever might be the freaks to which he gave himself up.

There still remains the question whether the workmen who take part with the irregular syndicates demand the benefits of the loi Bovier-Lapierre, while so loudly scorning the law of 1884. The attitude of their representatives in the Chamber of Deputies would make one believe that they ask for the good things of the one law and reject the obligations of the other, although the two laws would be connected.

article of the law of the 21st of March, 1884, on workmen's syndicates, which recognized the right of combination and of striking. The majority of those who demanded and obtained these legislative changes received, however, and accepted, the name of Socialists. But now, in France, so far from Socialism being a movement of liberty and equality, it might be defined :-The intervention of the State in contracts of labor, always directed against the employer and to the exclusive profit of the laborer.

II.

In 1789 the French Revolution affirmed the rights of man against the rights of the State. During its continuance there was but one really Socialistic manifestation-that of Babœuf. The real awakening of Communistic ideas was at the Restoration and under the Government of Louis Philippe. Saint-Simon and Fourrier were its two most eminent exponents. Louis Blanc, in a little book entitled L'Organisation du Travail, made a passionate criticism of the actual state of society. He proposed State workshops, in which, as an incitement to work, would be placed large placards bearing the inscription: "Whoever does not work is a thief." He thought that the State should become the sole producer and the sole distributor of wealth. Proudhon published his book La Propriété c'est le Vol! and, while ridiculing the Communists, advocated the suppression of interest by the establishment of a bank of exchange in which barter should replace the use of money, as a means of the abolition of poverty and the equalization of fortunes.

Behold the phenomenon which has manifested itself. Until about 1889 social reforms were regarded as reforms in the direction of liberty and equality. It was at that point of view we placed ourselves when we obtained, by the law of the 2nd of April, 1868, the abrogation of article 1781 of the Civil Code, by virtue of which the master's mere word was taken as to the amount of These various conceptions resulted in wages and its payment. Again, it was the creation of the national workshops from that point of view that we pro- in 1848, and afterward led to the insurcured, in 1883, the repeal of the laws rection usually called les journées de which obliged the workman to carry juin. Under the Empire Socialistic about a book in which were entered ideas, though restrained, manifested sundry matters concerning him. It themselves in 1862 by the formation of was at that point of view we placed l'Internationale. They came to a head ourselves to attain the repeal of Article in the Commune of 1871. Resting la416 of the Penal Code, which prohibited tent after that, they grew in strength workmen from suspending their labors and expanded after the amnesty of in order to obtain an increase of wages. 1879, which brought back to France That article, modified by the law of the old chiefs and champions of the 1864, was finally abrogated by the first Commune. A certain number of these,

among them M. Jules Guesde, came back imbued with the Socialism of Karl Marx, and presented as their programme the accession of the "Fourth Estate." They said that if the Revolution of 1789 had suppressed the privileges of the nobility and clergy, in making them equal before the law with the Third Estate," it had acted to the profit only of the bourgeoisie-that it had created a" capitalist class," and that the workmen constituting the "Fourth Estate" must make their '89. Their political resource was a war of classes-as if there were classes recognized by the public or domestic law of France! They repeated the formula of Marx concerning the "surplus labor which gives profit to the employer," so that an employer has but to multiply the number of his workmen and their hours of labor to make his fortune! They demanded, therefore, as an immediate and practical measure, the limitation of the hours of labor by law. After that they showed what steps should be taken to transform the supply of food into a public function, by the municipalities at first, to be followed by the "socialization" of the instruments of production-the machinery of industry and the land.

In order to distinguish their various schools, French Socialists take the names, not of principles, but of men. The Marxists, the disciples of Karl Marx, are also called Guesdists. The Broussists, who follow M. Paul Brousse, form le parti ouvrier, properly so called. The Allemanists have for their leader a working printer, M. Allemane. The Blanquists, who are attached to the tradition of the ancient conspirator Blanqui, dream above all of riots and insurrections, without troubling themselves much about the economic transformations to follow in their wake. They love the Social Revolution for the Revolution itself. They are the devotees of art as art.

In reality, all the Socialists are much more divided by personal questions than by questions of doctrine. They are all of opinion that the actual state of society is worthless, that legislation should interfere vigorously to give to the laborers all the privileges they may demand, that however great these de

mands may be they will never be sufficient, and that the end to be arrived at is the expropriation of the "capitalist class." Thus, as may well be believed, this expropriation is to be violent; though the expropriators declare with touching unanimity that, if this violence come about, it will not be their fault, but that of those who resist them. While waiting for this beautiful consummation of their dreams, they go every year, on the 28th of May, to celebrate religiously the anniversary of the defeat of the Commune in 1871. In inflammatory harangues, they render homage to the heroes who stirred up civil war and burnt down the monuments of Paris under the eyes of the Prussians; and they take solemn oaths to take their revenge, not against the external enemy, about whom they have never concerned themselves, but against the internal enemy-their fellow-citizens of France.

III.

While living in expectation of this grand day, notwithstanding their intestine divisions and the confusion and contradiction of certain of their ideas, they are taking an active part in politics, and their action is growing, for reasons I will now explain.

Very wisely, their principal chiefs have understood that the peasants-the small French proprietors and cultivators, who, of all the principles of right, know best that which asserts that "nul n'est tenu de rester dans l'indivision" -would not be accessible, for a long time at least, to their Collectivist theories; so they address themselves to the centres in which are found the workmen employed in large scale production. They have put before them, as an immediate object, the capture of the municipalities. They succeeded, at the last municipal elections, in installing Socialism, with flying colors, in twenty-nine municipalities, of which three are large towns-Roubaix, Montluçon, and Saint-Denis.

At the same time they tried to force the gates of the Chamber of Deputies. In 1889 they cunningly profited by Boulangism, some bidding for its support, others for the support of its adversaries. A dozen succeeded.

M. Goblet, an ex-minister, having been beaten, in 1889, in two successive elections in the Somme and Department of the Seine, and stranded since 1891 in the Senate, where he found himself without influence, was devoured by the ambition of playing anew an active part and returning to power. In the elections of 1893-in concert with another deputy, M. Millerand, very clever and the less scrupulous with regard to doctrines as he knows nothing about them-M. Goblet conceived the idea of the "Socialist Union." The project was to associate certain Radical Republicans with the Socialists in common electoral action. They also managed to draw to their alliance the former Boulangists. M. Goblet, a late Minister of the Interior, who had, in 1882, to repress the disorders of the strike of Bessèges a late deputy of the Left Centre who had been one of the most embittered adversaries of the amnesty --presented himself to the electors in company with, late members and convicts of the Commune of 1871 and professional revolutionists.

This scheme succeeded. To-day they reckon that they will enter the Chamber to the number of sixty-eight. This is relatively few when compared with the 581 members who compose the Chamber of Deputies, if we must not add some Socialistic Radicals who will follow them with docility and even go beyond them sometimes in order to manifest their existence, and, finally, an indeterminate number of deputies who, being without any strong convictions and having characters more or less feeble, will allow themselves to be seduced and intimidated. These Republicans believe themselves very clever, and will say to justify their weakness: "It would not do to let them have the monopoly of social questions! By following them, we shall absorb them."

In France there is a legendary personage who throws himself in the water for fear of wetting himself and who is called Gribouille. These people who, for fear of Socialism, throw themselves into it have for their patron saint this illustrious Gribouille.

IV.

It is because of this policy that Socialism has made such strides in these

latter years. Republicans, reactionaries, monarchists, adversaries of the Republic of all shades, have desired to attract to themselves "the working classes." They have therefore wished to give them des satisfactions-to prove that they were attentive to them; and, instead of seeking reforms which would have been just and really useful to them, they have laid themselves out to flatter their prejudices, or, rather, the prejudices of their leaders. To this game of political self-seeking must be added that of the Protectionists.

The manufacturers, in order to obtain the raising of the customs duties on their wares, have incited their workpeople to take part with them. They have told them and urged them to repeat that the State should be the protector of "the national industry" against that of foreigners. Some employers have even been so imprudent, in their mad passion, as to drive them on to riotous manifestations and threats. They have thus spread the conviction among the work people that the State can usefully intervene in order to fix the prices of goods and make them as dear as they like. Naturally the workmen, thus indoctrinated, have listened with enthusiastic docility to the Socialists who afterward came and told them : "Your employers declare that the State can, by good laws, by good tariffs, raise the prices of goods and guarantee profits. But the State can also raise the rate of wages and guarantee to you a minimum. If it guards their profits against foreign competition, it ought also to insure your fair share of these benefits. They have claimed the assistance of society.' Demand it in your turn." And they have demanded it, as is proved by the letter of the Lillebonne strikers published in the Siècle of the 7th of June last.

Some Protectionists such as M. Richard Waddington, brother of the late French ambassador at Londonthink themselves clever in swimming with this stream. M. Waddington, who is a Protectionist, has declared himself a Socialist, and has demanded with persistent energy the intervention of the State in labor contracts. has drawn up a report on the law of the employment of children, young girls, and women in our manufactures.

He

« ZurückWeiter »