[96] F. Pelloutier, _op. cit._, p. 77.

In 1897, at the Congress of Toulouse, Pelloutier read two reports in which he invited the _Bourses du Travail_ to extend their activities to the agricultural population and to the sailors. These reports reveal a thorough study of the conditions in which these two cla.s.ses of the population spend their lives, and contain indications how to attract them to syndical activity. Pelloutier recommended the Bourses to create commissions which should be specially devoted to agricultural problems and which should train propagandists for the country. He also recommended the inst.i.tution of homes for sailors in the ports.

Some Bourses acted on the suggestion of Pelloutier and since then dates the propaganda carried on by some Bourses among the wood-cutters, the wine-growers, the agricultural laborers, the fishermen, sailors and similar groups of the working population.

From 1898 to 1900 the Federal Committee was trying to systematize the services of the _placement_ and of the _viatic.u.m_. The suggestion came from some Bourses, which particularly felt this necessity. Some Bourses had already been placing workingmen at a distance through correspondence. They wanted to generalize this by having the Federal Committee publish statistics of the fluctuations of employment in the various Bourses. On the other hand, the Bourses had difficulties with the service of _viatic.u.m_. The diversity of conditions in this respect gave rise to dissatisfaction, while the Bourses were unable to control abuses. The secretaries could not know the number of visits paid them by workingmen, nor the amounts received by each.

At the Congress of Rennes (1898), the Federal Committee presented a plan of a "federal viatic.u.m", and in 1900, the _Office national de statistique et de placement_ was organized. The "federal viatic.u.m" was optional for members of the federation, and though presenting certain advantages for the Bourses, was accepted by very few of them. Organized in 1899, it functioned unsatisfactorily.

The _Office national_ began activity in June, 1900. It was organized with the financial aid of the government. In 1900, after the Universal Exhibition, Paris was overcrowded with unemployed workingmen, and the government thought it could make use of the Federation of Bourses to disperse them over the country. Before that, in November, 1899, the Federal Committee had addressed the government for a subsidy of 10,000 francs to organize the _Office national_. In June, 1900, the Government granted 5,000 francs. The _Office_ began to publish a weekly statistical bulletin containing the information on the fluctuation of employment sent to the Federal Committee by the Bourses. The _Office_, however, did not give the expected results. In organizing these services, the Federation of Bourses always kept in mind the interests of the syndicats. It directed workingmen to employers who satisfied the general conditions imposed by the syndicats. The _viatic.u.m_ also served to diminish compet.i.tion among workingmen in ordinary times, or during strikes.

In all its activity the Federal Committee generally followed the same policy. It called the attention of one Bourse to the experiments and to the achievements of others; it made its own suggestions and recommendations and it carried out the decisions of the Congresses. It did not regard itself as a central organ with power to command.

Const.i.tuted on a federalist basis, the Bourses expected from the Federal Committee merely the preliminary study of problems of a common interest, reserving for themselves the right to reject both the problems and the study; they considered even their Congresses merely as _foyers_ where the instruments of discussion and of work were forged.[97]

[97] F. Pelloutier, _op. cit._, p. 154.

The activity of the Federal Committee was handicapped by insufficiency of means. The financial state of the Federation between 1892 and 1902 may be gathered from the following table:

_Receipts_ _Expenses_ _Francs_ _Centimes_ _Francs_ _Centimes_

1892-1893 247 209 45 1893-1894 573 95 378 95 1894-1895 1,342 55 960 07 1895-1896 2,380 05 1,979 1896-1897 2,310 75 1,779 45 1897-1900 6,158 75 5,521 45 1900-1901 4,297 85 3,029 71 1901-1902 5,541-- 85 4,320 80

The Bourses paid their dues irregularly and Pelloutier complained that with such means the Committee could not render all the services it was capable of and that it was necessarily reduced to the role of a correspondence bureau, "slow and imperfect in its working."

Whatever others may have thought of the results obtained by the Federation of Bourses, the leaders themselves felt enthusiastic about the things accomplished. Pelloutier wrote:

Enumerate the results obtained by the groupings of workingmen; consult the program, of the courses inst.i.tuted by the _Bourses du Travail_, a program which omits nothing which goes to make up a moral, complete, dignified and satisfied life; regard the authors who inhabit the workingmen's libraries; admire this syndical and co-operative organization which extends from day to day and embraces new categories of producers, the unification of all the proletarian forces into a close network of syndicats, of co-operative societies, of leagues of resistance; consider the constantly increasing intervention into the diverse manifestations of social life; the examination of methods of production and of distribution and say whether this organization, whether this program, this tendency towards the beautiful and the good, whether this aspiration toward the complete expansion of the individual do not justify the pride the Bourses du Travail feel.[98]

[98] F. Pelloutier, _op. cit._, pp. 170-1.

This feeling and the preoccupation with socialist ideals led Pelloutier and other members of the Federation to think that the _Bourses du Travail_ could not only render immediate services, but that they were capable of "adapting themselves to a superior social order". Pelloutier thought that the _Bourses du Travail_ were evolving from this time on the elements of a new society, that they were gradually const.i.tuting a veritable socialist (economic and anarchic) state within the bourgeois state,[99] and that they would, in time, subst.i.tute communistic forms of production and of distribution for those now in existence. The question was brought up for discussion at the Congress of Tours (1896) and two reports were read on the present and future role of the _Bourses du Travail_. One report was written by Pelloutier, the other was prepared by the delegates of the Bourse of Nimes, Claude Gignoux and Victorien Briguier (Allemanists).

[99] F. Pelloutier, _op. cit._, p. 160.

The report of the Bourse of Nimes starts out from the idea that no new plan of a future society need be fabricated; that the _Bourses du Travail_ show themselves already capable of directing the economic activities of society and that with further growth they will become more and more capable of so doing. The natural development of the Bourses, it held, leads them to investigate the number of unemployed in each trade; the causes of industrial perturbation, the cost of maintenance of each individual in comparison with wages received; the number of trades and of workingmen employed in them; the amount of the produce; the totality of products necessary for the population of their region, etc., etc.

Now, it further set forth, with all this information at hand, and with all this economic experience, each Bourse could, in case of a social transformation, a.s.sume the direction of the industrial life of its region. Each trade organized in a syndicat would elect a council of labor; the syndicats of the same trade would be federated nationally and internationally. The Bourses, knowing the quant.i.ty of products which must be produced, would impart this information to the councils of labor of each trade, which employ all members of the trade in the manufacture of necessary products. By their statistics, the Bourses would know where there is excess or want of production in their regions, and would determine the exchange of products between the territories which by nature are adapted for some special production only. The report presupposed that property would become "social and inalienable"; and the a.s.sumption was that the workingmen would be stimulated to develop the industrial powers of their regions and to increase the material welfare of the country. The report concluded:

This summary outline gives those who live in the syndical movement an idea of the role which falls and will fall to the _Bourses du Travail_. It would not do to hurry decisions; the methodical pursuit of the development of our inst.i.tutions is sufficient to realize our aim, and to avoid many disappointments and retrogressions. It is for us, who have inherited the thought and the science of all those who have come before us, to bring it about that so many riches and so much welfare due to their genius should not serve to engender misery and injustice, but should establish harmony of interests on equality of rights and on the solidarity of all human beings.[100]

[100] F. Pelloutier, _op. cit._, p. 163.

The report of the Federal Committee, prepared by Pelloutier, contained the same ideas but emphasized some other points. "We start out from the principle," read this report, "that the task of the revolution is to free mankind not only from all authority (_autorite_), but also from every inst.i.tution which has not for its essential purpose the development of production. Consequently, we can imagine the future society only as a voluntary and free a.s.sociation of producers."[101] In this social system the syndicats and the Bourses are to play the part a.s.signed to them in the report of the Bourse of Nimes.

[101] F. Pelloutier, _op. cit._, pp. 163-4.

The consequence of this new state, of this suppression of useless social organs, of this simplification of necessary machinery, will be that man will produce better, more and quicker; that he will be able, therefore, to devote long hours to his intellectual development, to accelerate in this way mechanical progress, to free himself more and more from painful work, and to arrange his life in greater conformity to his instinctive aspirations toward studious repose.

Pelloutier laid emphasis on the idea that this future state was being gradually prepared and was dependent upon the intellectual and moral development of the working-cla.s.s; he conceived it as a gradual subst.i.tution of inst.i.tutions evolved by the working-cla.s.s for those inst.i.tutions which characterize existing society. He believed that the syndicalist life was the only means of stimulating the power and the initiative of the workingmen and of developing their administrative abilities. His report, quoted above, concluded: "And this is the future in store for the working-cla.s.s, if becoming conscious of its intellectual faculties, and of its dignity, it will come to draw only from within itself its notion of social duty, will detest and break every authority foreign to it and will finally conquer security and liberty."[102]

[102] Seilhac, _Congres Ouvriers_, p. 317.

This conception of the syndicat has since become fundamental with revolutionary syndicalists. Formulating it, the _Federation des Bourses du Travail_ really laid the foundations of what later became revolutionary syndicalism. The "Federation of Bourses" also made the first step in the propaganda of anti-militarism and in outlining a policy of opposition to the State. The latter ideas, however, were at the same time developed in the General Confederation of Labor and will be considered in connection with the history of that body in the next chapter.

From 1894 to 1902 the _Federation des Bourses du Travail_ was the strongest syndical organization in France. Pelloutier claimed 250,000 members for it, but the figure is exaggerated. There is no way, however, of finding out the true figures.

Conscious of its comparative strength, the Federation of Bourses at times ignored, at times dominated the General Confederation of Labor.

These two organizations were rivals. The General Confederation of Labor had adopted at Limoges (1895) statutes according to which the Confederation could admit not only National Federations of Syndicats, but single syndicats and single Bourses. This was obnoxious to the Federation of Bourses. The latter wished that the General Confederation should be composed exclusively of two federal committees; one representing the Federation of Bourses; the other representing the National Federations of trade. Until this was accepted, the Federation of Bourses, at its Congress in Tours (1896), refused to give any financial aid to the General Confederation in view "of the little vitality" which it displayed.

The General Confederation of Labor modified its statutes year after year, but no harmony between the two organizations could be established for some time. In 1897, the Federation of Bourses joined the General Confederation, but left it again in 1898.

The friction was due partly to personal difficulties, partly to the differences of spirit which prevailed in the central committees of the two organizations. After 1900, however, the two organizations, though distinct, co-operated, and the question of unifying the two organizations was more and more emphasized. In 1902, at the Congress of Montpellier, this unity was realized; the Federation of Bourses entered the General Confederation of Labor, and ceased to have a separate existence.

CHAPTER IV

THE GENERAL CONFEDERATION OF LABOR FROM 1895 TO 1902

The General Confederation of Labor has continued its existence under the same name since its foundation in 1895. Still the period from 1895 to 1902 may be considered separately for two reasons: first, during this period the organization of the Confederation under which it now functions was evolved;[103] and secondly, during this period the tendency known as revolutionary syndicalism became definite and complete. This period may be considered therefore as the formative period both from the point of view of organization and from the point of view of doctrine.

[103] The changes in the form of organization which have been made since 1902 are in harmony with the fundamental ideas of the const.i.tution adopted in 1902.

The gradual elaboration of organization and of doctrine may best be considered from year to year. The 700 syndicats which formed the General Confederation at Limoges in 1895 aimed to "establish among themselves daily relations which would permit them to formulate in common the demands studied individually; they wanted also and particularly to put an end to the disorganization which penetrated their ranks under cover of the political spirit."[104]

[104] _XI Congres National Corporatif_ (Paris, 1900), p. 35.

The Congress held the following year at Tours (1896) showed that the aim was not attained. Only 32 organizations had paid the initiation fee (two francs) as requested by the statutes adopted at Limoges. Of the 32 only four, the _Federation des Travailleurs du Livre_,[105] the Syndicat of Railway Men, the Circle of Machinists, and the Federation of Porcelain Workers, paid their dues regularly; the rest paid irregularly or did not pay at all. The entire income for the year amounted to 740 francs.[106]

[105] Typographical Union.

[106] Seilhac, p. 328.

The National Council of the Confederation did not function because the number of delegates elected by the adhering organizations was insufficient to const.i.tute the committees among which the work was to be divided. The few delegates that did attend the meetings quarreled for political and other reasons. The Federation of Bourses showed itself hostile, because the statutes adopted at Limoges admitted Bourses, single syndicats, local and regional federations.

The "Committee for the propaganda of the General Strike" could also report but little progress. The Committee had been authorized by the Congress of Nantes (1894) to collect 10 per cent of all subscriptions for strikes. The Committee, however, reported to the Congress of Tours, that the syndicats and Bourses did not live up to the decision. From December 1, 1894, to September 12, 1892, 329 francs 75 centimes was collected; for 1895-96, 401 francs 95 centimes. With such limited means but little headway could be made.[107]

[107] Seilhac, _Congres Ouvriers_, p. 325; Ch. Franck, _op. cit._, p.

323.

The Congress of Tours tried to remedy the situation by making several changes in the statutes. Single Bourses were not to be admitted. This was a concession to the Federation of Bourses, which was invited to join the Confederation; single syndicats were to be admitted only if there were no national federations in their trades. Each National Federation of trade or of industry could send three delegates to the National Council; syndicats and local federations, only one. Each delegate to the National Council could represent two organizations only, while formerly he could represent five. The National Council was to nominate an executive committee consisting of a secretary, a.s.sistant secretary, treasurer, a.s.sistant treasurer, and archivist. The work of the Confederation was to be divided among seven committees. Dues were to be paid on a graduated scale according to membership.

Besides modifying the statutes, the Congress of Tours discussed several other questions; eight-hour day, weekly rest, the general strike and the establishment of a trade organ.

The idea of the general strike, defended by Allemanists and anarchists, was indorsed by the Congress with a greater majority than at previous Congresses. By this time, however, several modifications had taken place in the conception of the general strike. These were emphasized by M.

Guerard who defended the idea before the Congress. Said M. Guerard:

The conquest of political power is a chimera; there are at present only three or four true socialists in the Chamber of Deputies out of 585. Of 36,000 communes, only 150 have as yet been conquered.