VII. The Alliance after the Hague Congress

• • Introduction
  • II. The secret Alliance
  • III. The Alliance in Switzerland
  • IV. The Alliance in Spain
  • V. The Alliance in Italy
  • VI. The Alliance in France
  • VII. The Alliance after the Hague Congress
  • VIII. The Alliance in Russia
  • IX. Conclusion
  • X. Appendix
  • XI. Documents

Add another subpage

Read the help page for usage.

 

It is known that at the last sitting of the Hague Congress, the fourteen delegates of the minority tabled a declaration of protest against the resolutions adopted. This minority consisted of the following delegates: four Spanish, five Belgian, two Jurassian, two Dutch, and one American.

After having agreed at Brussels with the Belgians on the principles for common action against the new General Council, the Jurassians and the Spaniards left for Saint-Imier in Switzerland to hold the anti-authoritarian Congress which the Alliance had arranged to have convoked by its acolytes in Rimini.

This Congress was preceded by that of the Jura Federation, which rejected the resolutions of The Hague, notably the one expelling Bakunin and Guillaume. As a result, the Federation was suspended by the General Council.

The Alliance was fully represented at the anti-authoritarian congress. Beside the Spaniards and the Jurassians, there were six Italian delegates, including Costa, Cafiero, Fanelli, and Bakunin in person; two delegates claimed to represent “several French sections”, and another delegate—two American ones. In all, fifteen “allies”. This Congress finally offered Bakunin “all the guarantees of an impartial and serious trial”; and here, too, complete unanimity prevailed. These men, of whom at least half did not belong to the International, appointed themselves members of a supreme tribunal called upon to pronounce the final sentence upon the acts of a General Congress of our Association. They announced their absolute rejection of all resolutions passed by the Hague Congress and refused to recognise in any way the powers of the new General Council elected by it. Finally, they formed, on behalf of their federations and without any form of mandate to that effect, an offensive and defensive alliance, a “pact of friendship, of solidarity, and of mutual defence”, against the General Council and all those who recognised the resolutions of the Hague Congress. They defined their abstentionist anarchism in the following resolution, which was a direct condemnation of the Paris Commune:

“The Congress declares 1 ) that the destruction of all political power is the first duty of the proletariat; 2) that any organisation of supposedly provisional and revolutionary political power aiming to bring about this destruction can only be yet another hoax and will be as dangerous to the proletariat as all governments in existence today.”

Finally, it was decided to invite the other autonomist federations to join the new pact and to hold a second anti-authoritarian Congress six months later.

The split within the International was thus proclaimed. From that moment, the Jura Committee openly took over the management of the dissidents’ affairs. The part of the International which followed it was no more than the old public Alliance reconstituted and serving as a cover and tool for the secret Alliance.

On returning to Spain, the four Aymon sons, members of the Spanish Alliance, published a manifesto full of calumnies against the Congress at The Hague and flattery for the one at Saint-Imier. The Federal Council supported this libel and, on the orders of the Swiss centre, convoked at Cordoba for December 25, 1872 the regional Congress which was not to have taken place until April 1873. The Swiss centre, for its part, hastened to disclose to everybody the subordinate position which the Council had been occupying beside it. Over the head of the Spanish Council, the Jura Committee sent the Saint-Imier resolutions to all the local federations in Spain.

At the Congress of Cordoba, there were only 36 federations represented out of 101 (the official number given by the Federal Council); and so this was a minority Congress if ever there was one. The newly formed federations were represented by numerous delegates; Alcoy had six, and yet this federation had never been represented before in a regional Congress. Even during the time of the Hague Congress, it had not yet existed, since it had not provided one vote or one centime to the Spanish delegation. The important and active federations, such as Gracia (500 members), Badalona (500), Sabadell (125), Sans (1,061), were conspicuous by their absence. In a list of forty-eight delegates, there were fourteen notorious Alliance members, of whom ten represented federations of which they were not members and which probably did not even know them. Sure of the majority which it had engineered, the Alliance gave itself a free hand. The regional federation’s statutes, drawn up at Valencia and sanctioned at Saragossa, were scrapped, the Spanish Federation decapitated, and its Federal Council replaced by a simple correspondence and statistical commission which did not even retain the function of sending in the Spanish subscriptions to the General Council. Finally, the Alliance broke with the International, rejecting the resolutions of the Hague Congress and adopting the Saint-Imier pact. It went so far in its anarchy as to repudiate in advance the next General Congress and to substitute for it a new anti-authoritarian Congress

“ in case the first one does not restore the dignity and independence of the International by repudiating the Hague Congress”.

At The Hague, the Alliance wanted to impose, by means of the Spanish imperative mandate, the manner of voting which best suited it at the time. At Cordoba, it went so far as to prescribe, nine months in advance, the resolutions which must be adopted by the next General Congress. It must be admitted that the autonomy of sections and federations could not be pushed any further.

In expelling the Alliance and its leaders from the International, the Hague Congress gave fresh impetus to the anti-Alliance movement in Spain. The New Madrid Federation was supported in its newly launched campaign by the federations of Saragossa, Vitoria, Alcalâ de Henares, Gracia, Lerida, Dénia, Pont de Vilumara, Toledo, Valencia, the new federation of Cadiz, etc. The Federal Council’s circular convoking the Congress of Cordoba asked it to set itself up in judgment on the resolutions passed at the Hague General Congress. This was in flagrant violation not only of the General Rules, but also of the Spanish regional statutes, which stated in Article 13:

“The Federal Council will implement, and will cause to be implemented, the resolutions of the regional and international Congresses.”

The New Madrid Federation reacted with a circular to the other local federations in which it declared that by this act the Federal Council had put itself outside the International, and asked them to replace it with a new provisional council whose mission would be strict observance of the Rules and not passive obedience to the Alliance’s orders. This proposal was accepted; a new Federal Council was appointed with its seat at Valencia. In its first circular (February 2, 1873), it declared itself to be “the faithful guardian of the International’s Rules as drawn up and sanctioned at the international and regional Congresses”, and protested vigorously against those who wished to sow

“anarchy within the International, anarchy before revolution, disarmament before triumph! What a joy to the bourgeoisie!”

The Belgians held their Congress at the same time as the Spaniards and likewise rejected the Hague resolutions. The General Council replied to them, as to the Spanish secessionists, with the resolution of January 26, 1873, which declared that “all societies or individuals refusing to acknowledge the Congress resolutions, or wilfully neglecting to perform the duties imposed by the rules and administrative regulations—place themselves outside of, and cease to belong to the International Working Men’s Association.” On May 30, it finalised this declaration with the following resolution:

“Whereas the Congress of the Belgian federation, held at Brussels on the 25th 8c 26th day of December 1872, resolved to declare null 8c void the resolutions of the 5th General Congress;

“Whereas the Congress of a part of the Spanish federation, held at Cordoba from December 25th [1872] to January 2nd 1873, resolved: to repudiate the resolutions of the 5th General Congress 8c to adopt the resolutions of an anti-international meeting;

“Whereas a meeting, held at London January 26th 1873, resolved: to repudiate the action taken by the 5th General Congress;

“The General Council of the International Workingmen’s Association in obedience to the statutes 8c administrative regulations 8c in accordance with its resolution of January 26th 1873, hereby declares:

“All regional 8c local federations, sections 8c individuals having participated in 8c recognising the resolutions of the above mentioned meetings & Congresses at Brussels, Cordoba 8c London,— have placed themselves outside of Sc are no longer members of the International Workingmen’s Association.”

At the same time, it declared once more that no regional Italian federation of the International exists, since no organisation calling itself by this name has fulfilled the minimal conditions for admission and affiliation as imposed by the Rules and Administrative Regulations. In different parts of Italy, however, there are sections which are in order as far as the General Council is concerned and are in communication with it.

For their part, the Jurassians held another Congress on April 27 and 28 at Neuchâtel. There were nineteen delegates present from ten Swiss sections, and a so-called section from Alsace; two Swiss sections and one French section sent no delegates. The Jura Federation thus claimed to count twelve sections in Switzerland. But the delegate for Moutier declared that he had only come to speak in favour of reconciliation with the International, and had an imperative mandate not to take part in the work of the Congress. Moutier had, in fact, broken away from the Jura Federation after the Congress of Saint-Imier. This left eleven sections. The fact that the report from the Committee scrupulously abstained from giving the slightest indication about their internal position and their strength gives us the right to assume that they had no more vitality than at the time of the Congress of Sonvillier. In compensation, the report draws up in battle order the external forces of the Jurassians, the allies whom the Alliance gained after the Hague Congress. According to this report, they were nearly all federations of the International:

“Italy” — But we have seen that there is no Italian federation.

“Spain”—Although the majority of the Spanish International members have moved across into the secessionist camp, we have just seen that the Spanish Federation still exists and is in regular communication with the General Council.

“France, in what is seriously organised there”, that is, the “section of France”, which apologised to the Congress of Neuchâtel for not having sent a delegate. We are taking good care not to disclose to the Jurassians what is still “seriously organised” in France, despite the latest persecutions, which have demonstrated well enough on whose side this serious organisation was and which, as always, have solicitously spared the few Alliance members in France.

“The whole of Belgium”—is the dupe of the Alliance, whose principles she is far from sharing.

“Holland, except for one section”—that is to say, two Dutch sections supported not the Saint-Imier pact, but the anti-separatist declaration of the minority at The Hague.

“England, except for a few dissidents”!—The “dissidents”, that is to say, the vast majority of the English sections of the International, held their Congress on June 1 and 2 at Manchester, where twenty-six delegates were present representing twentythree sections; whereas the “England” of the Jurassians had no sections or Federal Council, much less a Congress.

“America, apart from a few dissidents”!—The American Federation of the International exists and functions regularly in complete harmony with the General Council. It has its Federal Council and its Congresses. The “America” of the Jura Committee consists purely of those bourgeois dealers in free love, paper money, public appointments and bribes, who were represented so magnificently at the Hague Congress by Mr. West that even the Jura delegates dared not speak or vote in his favour.

“The Slavs”—that is to say, the “Slav section of Zurich”, which, as always, figures as a whole race. The Poles, the Russians, and the Austrian and Hungarian Slavs of the International, as open enemies of the secessionists, do not count.

This is what the allies of the Alliance amounted to. If the eleven Jura sections were no more real than the majority of these allies, their committee had good reason to keep silent about them.

In this battle order of the Alliance, Switzerland was conspicuous by her absence. There were very good reasons for this. A month later, on June 1 and 2, a general Swiss Working Men’s Congress was held in Olten to organise resistance and strikes. Five Jurassians there preached the gospel of absolute autonomy of the sections; they made the Congress waste over half its time. Finally, the matter had to be put to vote. The result was that of eighty delegates, seventy-five voted against the five Jurassians who had no alternative but to leave the hall.

At its secret gatherings, however, the Alliance apparently did not subscribe, where its real forces were concerned, to the illusions which it wanted to impose on the public. At that same Congress of Neuchâtel, it had the following resolution adopted:

“Considering that, in accordance with the General Rules, the General Congress of the International meets every year without need of convocation by the General Council, the Jura Federation proposes to all the federations of the International that they should meet for a General Congress on Monday, September 1, in a Swiss town.”

And to prevent this congress from repeating the “fatal errors of The Hague”, it was requested that the Alliance delegates and their allies should meet, on August 28, for an anti-authoritarian Congress. From the debate on this proposition, it emerges that

“for us, the only General Congress of the International will be the one convoked directly by the federations themselves, and not the one which the so-called General Council of New York might attempt to convoke”

Here, then, is the split carried to extremes with all the attendant consequences. The members of the International will go to the congress which the preceding Congress has instructed the General Council to convoke in a Swiss town of its own choosing. The Alliance members and their suite of dupes will go to a congress convoked by themselves on the strength of their autonomy. We wish them a pleasant journey.