the party journals and organs of propaganda. Besides Singer there are other prominent party leaders, including Auer, another extraordinary organizer; Kautsky, the scholar of the movement, and Legien, the head of the trade union forces.

Two days of the congress were given to the debate upon the general strike, or what the Germans significantly call the Politischen Massenstreik. Within recent years the idea of the general strike has gained many adherents in the European movement. In France and Italy, where the revolutionary tradition is strong, and broad generalization seductive, the idea of such an uprising of the workers has taken firm hold on the imagination. In Germany and England it has few advocates. In Belgium it has been twice employed to force political reforms, once with signal success. The immense revolutionary power resting in its natural and proper use was shown once in Russia. In Germany there has recently arisen a demand on the part of the more extreme sections of the party, the hotter heads, and especially the anarchosocialists, for its adoption as an ordinary weapon of the working class against the tyrannies of the government. At the congress of the trade unions at Cologne in 1905, a resolution advocating the use of the general strike was rejected. But a few months later the socialist congress at Jena expressed recognition of its value and advocated its use. Bebel himself spoke in its favor. Later, however, when the party was considering plans for an immense propaganda to gain universal suffrage in the elections for the Prussian Landtag, and to retort to the assaults directed against universal suffrage in certain other German states, and the general strike was proposed as a means to that end, Bebel declared that the moment

had not come for such extreme measures and that he would oppose all propaganda looking to immediate action of that character. This series of events created throughout the party a lively discussion, and to clear up the matter the subject of the general strike was put upon the program for discussion at this congress.

Bebel, in summing up its recent history, maintained that the general strike cannot be organized artificially. "It is possible," he said, "only when the masses are in a high ferment. In Russia the use of the general strike has broken down. Such successful strikes as there have been of this character were not artificially organized by the working men's associations. They were provoked by events. In August, 1906, the workers refused to participate in the strike because they considered it inopportune." Bebel's opposition to the use of the general strike, except under extraordinary conditions and with the accompaniment of a revolutionary state of mind on the part of the masses, called forth a heated discussion. Young Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg attacked Bebel's position with considerable warmth, but at the close of the debate Bebel was supported by a large

vote.

The resolution upon which this debate took place, while reaffirming the declaration of the congress of Jena, recommended with particular insistence consideration of the resolutions which favored the reënforcement and development of the party organization, and the reciprocal affiliation of the members of the trade unions to the political groups. It also declared that as soon as the national committee of the party recognized the necessity for a general strike, it must put itself in relation with the national committee of the trade unions in order to take

all the measures necessary to assure to the action a fruitful result.

In one paragraph of the resolution it was declared that trade unions were indispensable to the bettering of the conditions of the workers under the present state of society, but that having a class conscience, the unionists should equally pursue the aims of the Social Democratic Party in seeking to deliver the working-class from the present wage-system. Kautsky created an important discussion by proposing as an amendment that the trade unions should be dominated by the spirit, and bound by the decisions, of the party. This brought up one of the most burning questions of socialist politics; namely, whether or not the unions should have an independent existence. In France the trade unionists have assumed an attitude of neutrality; in America they forbid all politics in the unions; in Belgium they are a part of the political organization; and in England they are a political organization. It is an old and much-debated question of tactics. Kautsky is an uncompromising believer in the unions being dominated by socialist political policies. But he and his supporters were defeated, and the revised amendment which follows was put and carried by a large majority :—

"To assure the unity of thought and of action of the party and of the unions, which is supremely necessary to the victorious march of the proletarian class struggle, it is indispensable that the unions should be permeated by the spirit of social democracy. It is the duty of all members of the party to work toward this end."

The thing that impressed me most at the German congress was its distinct proletarian character, and the extraordinary intelligence and ability of the working

men in attendance. I spoke of this to Ledebour, one of the most effective and pleasing orators of the party, and a member of the Reichstag from Liebknecht's old constituency in Berlin. He remarked that it had become noticeably more so in recent years. The opposition to the party on the part of middle-class parents, and the prejudice inculcated by instructors in the schools and universities, had kept the younger men of better education out of the movement. For this reason

it became necessary for the socialists to have a school of their own to train the youth of the working-class as editors and secretaries.

Το

As the proletarian character of the movement struck me, so did the independent, able, and frank discussion on all the important matters. The officials, the editors, and the representatives in the Reichstag were called to account for every act that could justly be questioned or was of a controversial nature. The German rank and file are not being blindly led anywhere; and while Bebel's power is immense, it results-aside from his exceptional ability - from the scrupulous care with which he always presents his side of any case. those who hear him there can be no mistaking of his position. His sincerity, and the way an idea dominates his mind, so that he can present it to his audience from every conceivable point of view, enables him to carry his party with him. Thorough, painstaking thinking, clear and forceful repetition of his thought with exhaustive care to make his position clear to the most obstinate opponent or the most stupid auditor, are to my mind. the secret of this extraordinary man's success. It is a power which Lincoln had, only Lincoln had it in an even more gifted way. He was usually able to make

his position clear in a few words. Bebel attains the same end, but, at times, only by the most laborious

means.

It struck me also that the party was to all outward appearances conservative. It is conscious of its enormous power and feels deeply its responsibility. I do not mean that it is cowardly, that it does not take the most advanced ground in its political program, or that it dilutes in any way the revolutionary aim of the movement. What I mean is that it is not uselessly offending any one. Inside the party the leaders are extremely

careful not to offend the more backward and slow-moving elements, which are perhaps as numerous in the German movement as elsewhere. The more advanced are willing to sacrifice positions which they would otherwise take or hold in order to retain the adhesion of the less revolutionary members. They scrupulously avoid giving offence to the trade unions, and give them all assistance and consideration in their method of advancing the proletarian cause.* I suspect a majority of the congress were in favor of Kautsky's resolution, only they were unwilling to press it against the wishes of the trade unionists.

Outside the party they are quite as careful not to give the reactionary elements in the empire any unnecessary

*The party maintains the closest possible relation with the trade union movement, which is now the strongest in the world, numbering in all its branches 2,300,000 members. At the end of 1906 the trade unions connected with the great central organization numbered 1,799,293 members, or an increase of 369,000 over the preceding year. The women in the movement numbered 132,821, as against 89,500 in the previous year. The total receipts amounted to over $10,500,000, and the expenses to $8,000,000. Strikes and lockouts cost about $4,750,000; while sickness and out-ofwork pay only absorbed $1,750,000.