be in control of the party. Here too the general strike has been tried and although it is claimed by its opponents to have failed, there is still much talk of such methods and of the ineffectiveness of purely parliamentary methods.

Sweden too has been trying new weapons in the class struggle since the last international Congress and has a movement within the Socialist ranks calling for more direct revolutionary action.

But it is from Russia, the nation where the revolution is even now in progress that the greatest inpulse has been received. Russia has not only added overwhelming proof to the already great mass of evidence tending to show that the old maxim of Socialist action"General strike is general nonsense" is in itself a good deal of nonsense, but Russia has also demonstrated by the Moscow insurrection that Marx was wrong when he said that the coming of the machine gun marked the end of barricades and violent popular revolutionary uprisings. Russia has shown that there is no weapon which the proletariat can afford to lay completely out of its reach as inapplicable in its battle for freedom. Russia has also shown that these various weapons so far from being contradictory or mutually exclusive are to a certain extent complementary and may be co-ordinated into one general tactic of class warfare.

Instead of the revolutionary army being split up into unionists, terrorists, parliamentarians etc. the best minds in Russia are seeking to co-ordinate organize and utilize all these methods,-each in the place and time for which it is suited.

It is still too early to generalize with any certainty concerning these tendencies and especially to give any definite explanations as to the manner in which this movement will affect us in the United States. Yet some tentative suggestions may be offered.

The Socialist movement in the United States, as in many other countries, has to a certain extent got away from the class struggle. It may hold to all the theories of the class struggle as firmly as ever, indeed it may repeat the phrases more glibly than at any period in its history, yet when there is a real battle on between the forces of capitalism and the laborers, few look to see the Socialist Party play any prominent part. The one great and gratifying exception to this has been the fight for the Western Federation of Miners, and this exception is most brilliant proof of the general rule. This fight has done more for socialism in the United States than anything that has taken place since there has been a Socialist movement on this continent.

Yet we are still far from the stage where at the outbreak of every strike, or on the occasion of every outrage against the working class, the first question on every lip will be "What will the Socialist Party do?"

Yet we must reach this stage before we can claim to be the real leaders in the class struggle. It may be still true in military circles

that the directing powers sit aside upon a hill, but it is not true of the class struggle. If the Socialist Party is to earn the right to lead it must learn by doing, it must lead wherever the fight is hottest. Revolutions are never fought by phrases, they demand deeds, action. We shall not attempt to elaborate this point further at this time, but believe that if these facts are carefully thought over we may find the reason why, when Socialist sentiment in America is growing by leaps and bounds, the Socialist Party is almost standing still.

Owing to the absence of the editor in Europe this number is not only somewhat delayed, but contains no department of Book Reviews or Foreign News. The latter, however, is amply covered in the body of the magazine, while the former will be resumed in succeeding issues. While in Europe arrangements were made for numerous articles on current subjects by leading writers. These will appear in early issues and will add to the value of the Review even above its present standard. It was interesting to note that the International Socialist Review was the only American publicaion with which European Socialists are familiar to any great degree.

THE WORLD OF LABOR

BY MAX S. HAYES

The acquittal of W. D. Haywood upon the charge of being implicated in the assassination of ex-Gov. Steunenberg was very gratifying to the working people of the country, irrespective of what or ganization they were members or whether identified with no union. From the very beginning of the persecution-the lawless kidnaping episode those workers who endeavor to keep abreast of the times became imbued with a strong suspicion that the mine-owners and their politicians and Pinkertons had hatched a conspiracy to take the lives of the three men, and it was not very difficult, therefore, for the Socialist party and progressive trade unions to arouse the country and prevent the murderous plot from being executed. This incident of the class struggle also shows how easily and naturally the workers can cease their petty bickerings and present a solid front when a crisis approaches, and proves conclusively that there need be no fear that labor will fail to rise to every occasion when the hour strikes. We may have our family troubles, disputes and hairsplitting over details, yet when labor fully understands matters it is loyal and true to its class interests.

But while the termination of the Boise trial may be satisfactory to the country as a whole, what about the outrageous and vindictive treatment that is still being meted out to George Pettibone? When Haywood was placed on trial the persecutors declared they had the strongest case against him. The signal failure of the conspirators to convict him led to the logical conclusion that the other two defendants would be discharged from custody. But to the surprise of everybody the disappointed politicians of Idaho demanded a $25,000 bond before setting Moyer at liberty, although it is generally admitted by the persecutors that they had no case against him, and poor Pettibone is being made the object upon whom the conspirators may heap their reptilian venom and revenge themselves. Moyer, Haywood and Pettibone suffered imprisonment for a year and a half while their persecutors reveled in graft. Is there to be no compensation for the miners? Apparently not. On the contrary Pettibone is to remain incarcerated for an indefinite period, innocent of crime though he undoubtedly is.

It must not be supposed that because the persecutors are quiet and refrain from giving out daily interviews, as was their policy up to close of the Haywood trial, that they are not continuing their plotting. They demand a sacrifice, and if McPartland, Gooding and Borah can take the most damaging testimony given in the Haywood trial and use it as a basis to verify the stories that may be told by some of their dastardly perjurers, they are going to "get" Pettibone. Their inglorious defeat has made Gooding, Borah and

McPartland more desperate than ever. Unless they can get some sort of vindication their race is run. Gooding is fighting for his political life, and so is Borah, and likewise to keep out of jail for land grafting, while the Pinkerton thugs have not been hit so hard a blow since Homestead when Haywood was acquitted. The longer Pettibone can be kept imprisoned, the longer the powers at Washington may be prevailed upon to obstain from proceeding against Borah upon the charge of land thievery; the' longer time Gooding may have to fix his political fences, and the more boodle the Pinkertons can feed upon. Furthermore the conviction of Pettibone upon the charge of second degree murder or manslaughter would be hailed as a vindication by the conspirators, while the moral, or rather immoral, effect would give the plutocratic press the prayed-for excuse of continuing to denounce the Western Federation as a lawless and criminal organization. It is not unlikely that a jury can be selected in advance to agree to disagree, or since the miners won a victory in the Haywood case the said jury may be prevailed upon to give the other side a "square deal."

Because Secretary Haywood was acquitted is no reason why the working people of the country should enthuse and then go to sleep. The very act of keeping Pettibone in prison is conclusive proof in itself that the malevolent scoundrels who conspired to railroad innocent men to the gallows do not intend to acknowledge themselves defeated.

But what a travesty upon justice that three innocent men can be kept imprisoned for eighteen months and upward without recompense while their persecutors fairly riot in graft and enjoy the highest honors! Truly capitalism is the devil himself personified; it stamps the innocent guilty and the guilty innocent.

The expected has happened. The various employers' associations that stand for the open shop policy and refuse to recognize organized labor have formed a national federation for offensive and defensive purposes. A secret conference was held in New York the latter part of the past month at which the representatives of a score of associations made preliminary arrangements to combine to establish "industrial peace.' President Van Cleave, of the National Association of Manufacturers, was in the chair, and, according to his declarations, the utmost harmony prevailed and all delegates were enthusiastic in their determination to build up a powerful "peace federation." The plans discussed and adopted, subject to ratification of affiliated bodies, include the collection of a huge war fund to be placed at the disposal of the organization in any trade that engages in a contest with the unions. Labor bureaus—or, more correctly, scab supplying agencies-will be operated in all the important industrial centers, and through such bureaus complete records will be kept of employers, union and non-union, as well as organizers, agi tators and other undesirables. Another matter under consideration dealt with the legal and political phase of industrial affair. Certain national and state labor laws are to be attacked in the courts, and bills that are presented to law-making bodies will be closely scanned and defeated if possible where they aim to give labor an advantage. Plans will also be formulated to control candidates for office and to deliver their employes to the party or nominees most satisfactory.

Simultaneously with the New York conference a legal battle was precipitated in the District of Columbia by Van Cleave's attorneys which is destined to become one of the greatest contests that ever took place in this country and that is fraught with tremendous signi

ficance to organized labor. Van Cleave moved that President Gompers and other A. F. of L. officials be prohibited from publishing or circulating the Federation's unfair list. Van Cleave is president of the Bucks Stove & Range Co., of St. Louis. About a year ago he locked out the metal polishers because they refused to go back to a ten-hour system from the nine-hour day. The concern was placed on the "We don't patronize list," and Van Cleave says he was injured by the boycott. The action is regarded as a test case, and no matter which side wins in the lower courts it is practically certain that the United States Supreme Court will have to pass upon it finally. The open shoppers maintain that many state and district courts have declared the boycott illegal and unconstitutional, but they forget that still other courts have ruled that boycotting is lawful. There is no doubt that the new employers' federation will make the litigation as expensive as possible to organized labor, and that the plaintiffs' attorneys will twist and stretch every law and decision bearing upon this question to win their battle, and the union people might as well prepare for a long contest. Van Cleave and his tribe understand full well that if the boycott can be outlawed they will have delivered organized labor a stunning blow between the eyes, for it is only through the fear of reprisals that many employers are compelled to treat their workers decently. On the other hand, if labor wins unions and individual members need not greatly fear injunctions, damage suits and imprisonment in the future. From every viewpoint this case is epochmaking and should be carefully watched by all union workers and students of industrial affairs.

In this connection it might be stated that when the United States Supreme Court meets next month it will be confronted with a case that is closely related to the action brought by Van Cleave, the suit for $240,000 damages brought by D. E. Lowe, a hat manufacturer of Danbury, Conn., against officers and, members of the United Hatters. Lowe charges that boycott circulars have been sent to his customers and that his business has been greatly injured. The case brings on the question whether the plaintiff can maintain an action under the Sherman anti-trust law.

You have probably read of injunctions to prevent men from going on strike, as in the Ann Arbor railway and other cases; to prevent unions from paying strike benefits, as in the Chicago press feeders' and Boston teamsters' strikes; to prohibit striking girls from "making faces" at scabs at Paterson, N. J.; to prohibit persons from organizing a union, as in the case of the electrical workers at Wheeling, W. Va., and similar freakish edicts that only tend to bring the courts into contempt; but the craziest distortion of justice that has ever come under my notice occurred at Tarentum, Pa. The non-union glass bottle blowers went on strike in a local plant, and against the advice of union men. Then the district court jumps to the fore and issues an injunction against the union and officers restraining them from doing everything that they didn't do or want to do. The strikers are not in the union or in any manner connected with the organizauon or its officers. The courts have been so much in the habit of hitting union heads whenever they bob up that this Pennsylvania judge naturally hurled his edict against the organization because the non-unionists revolted.

On the first of next month another national struggle for the eight-hour day will begin. The Brotherhood of Bookbinders will fol low the example of the printers and order a general strike in all of