| 1 |
 |
“...PART I
From 1886 to 1896.Make-up of Early S. L. P.
De Leons Entrance into the Party.Bor-
ing From Within.Formation of S. T. &
L. A. and Endorsement of Same by S. L. P.
Forerunner of Industrial Unionism.
My earliest recollection of De Deon dates back to the year
1886, the days of the Henry George campaign and of the Na-
tionalist movement, a collectivist movement that had sprung
up after the publication of Edward Bellamys Looking Back-
ward, a book that stirred up not a little interest in those
days and that was industriously spread by all who took a
more than passing interest in Socialism. De Leon delivered a
lecture on some subject connected with that Nationalist move-
ment and I had gone over to New York to hear him. Of the
lecture itself I have today no recollection whatever, but the
lecturer, how he spoke and how he looked, all that I can con-
jure up before my minds eye as distinctly as though it hap-
pened yesterday. A portrait of De Leon, published in the 2Sth...”
|
|
| 2 |
 |
“... member as long as he possibly could. When,
finally, he had to do so the whole plot collapsed, for with the
seating of the new member, Ebert, the intriguers were re-
duced to two, H. Vogt and P. Murphy, as against J. Ebert.
A, C. Kihn and myself.
^ Hickey, the individual, it must be borne in mind, was
quite too insignificant to have caused all this turmoil, but he
served as a pretext, a rallying cry, so to speak, for all those
who either had turned or were about to turri against the
Party, and who later aimed at its destruction. These events,
before their final consummation, of course, led to a complete
rupture between De Leon and Vogt, the break taking place
in my office and in my presence. Vogt, as already stated,
had been holding up the counting of the vote for the new
member on the State Committee under all sorts of shifty pre-
texts so as to escape being outvoted in that body on the
Hickey matter. De Leon, already irritated almost beyond
endurance by what he saw going...”
|
|
| 3 |
 |
“...66 REMINISCENCES OF DANIEL DE LEON.
course, be entirely acceptable to them, but hardly to oursel-
yes.
The move made in 1908 came to naught, the S. P. Na-
tional Committee taking it upon itself to decline the invita-
tion for a conference, not taking the trouble to refer it to its
membership. Since then the S. L. P. has several times over
been induced to spend and wa.ste time and effort on the same
elusive task, the last time at the invitation of the S. P., a gen-
eral vote of that party having decided to invite the S. L. P. toa
Unity Conference."
There may be such of our members who reason that these
unity conferences bring the S. L. P. position to the attention
of the S. P. membership and that they have, for that reason,
a propagandist value. I doubt whether any considerable por-
tion of that membership ever hears about the result of these
conferences, and I also doubt that the few who do, ever get
more than a very much twisted version thereof.
There may also be...”
|
|
| 4 |
 |
“... temple upon the foundation that he
strove and fought and lived for, but we of the S. L. P. must
and will do as he would have done. As things look today,
the lead in laying the beginning of the new structure may
devolve upon Russia for the reason that Russia today holds
the imagination of the revolutionary working class the world
over. Let us hope that, when the time comes, she will be in
a position to take the lead. Perhaps, who knows, other na-
tions may by that time have trodden the path that Russia was
the first to venture upon; almost anything is possible in a
time like this and with the Russian example at hand.
In the new International, freed from the rubbish of bour-
geois connections that hampered and stifled the old and
caused its disgraceful collapse when the war-cloud broke, the
Socialist Labor Party of America will at last come into its
own, will contribute to the building material of the new struc-
ture its undying principles so clearly enunciated by De Leon
and...”
|
|
| 5 |
 |
“...46 WITH DE LEON SINCE 89.
those swayed a majority to their side who afterward clustered
around the Jewish Daily Forward. Some of them still cluster
there today. This fact of itself speaks volumes. Later the
opposition spread to some of the German assembly districts
Uptown and across the East River to Brooklyn, but at no time
from the beginning of the struggle to the final rupture of
1899 did the opposition control one single English-speaking
subdivision of the party.
This fact also speaks volumes. Not that the district or-
ganizations that were known as English-speaking were com-
posed of men whose ancestors came over on the Mayflower;
some of them were American born and others were of that
foreign element that followed the advice of Frederick En-
gels who, when he visited New York in 1891, said that the first
thing the Socialists from abroad should do was to acquire a
knowledge of the language of the land. Of course the im-
migrants from Great Britain and Ireland did...”
|
|
| 6 |
 |
“... vote in the 16th As-
sembly District rose to 2,207. Tammany Hall was alarmed.
The labor leaders in the Central Labor Union, who as a general
rule were boosting Tammany, were stricken with fear. The
oppositionists in and outside of the Socialist Labor Party were
stricken with something like yellow jaundice. Not only in the
16th A. D., but everywhere, the party made gains; 82,000 votes
were cast for the Socialist Labor Party. Something had to be
done. The cry that the party makes no progress, that was
raised a couple of years before could not be raised this time.
The oppositionists redoubled their efforts in the spreading of
slanders. De Leon was denounced by them as an anti-Semite
m Jewish districts; as a Jew among Gentiles; as a man who hated
the Germans, among the Germans, etc. The basest falsehoods
were told in the East Side cafs aibout De Leon. Gompcrs in
his paper made the allegation that De Leons name was Loeb,
not De Leon. The name of Henry Kuhn, who was then na...”
|
|
| 7 |
 |
“...
used by De Leon, and it was quite excusable at that, for there
were a number of men about with similar names, like Loewen-
fuss, etc.
Opposition Organized
With the advent of the year 1899 it became apparent that
the opposition had effected some sort of organization on a na-
tional scale. Connections had evidently been established by
the New York oppositionists with those of other cities. At
any rate the disgruntled elements were getting bolder and more
and more boisterous and bothersome generally. Instead of de-
voting the time to agitation work, party meetings were dragged
out for hours with wrangling; the energies even of the loyal
members were exhausted with endless discussions upon party
tactics. It was felt that a storm was gathering that had to
break, soon or late.
From within the party came the cry that the progress
made was too slow, in spite of the fact that really substantial
gains were made. The party had now nearly four hundred Sec-
tions throughout the...”
|
|
| 8 |
 |
“... elect all officers of the Section, suspend the Na-
tional Executive Committee, and the Volkszeitungs new exec-
utive committee would do the rest. In other words, repeat the
coup detat of 1889. This time, however, things went dif-
ferently.
De Leon the Storm-Center
The lines were now drawn between the loyal party mem-
bers, who were in favor of the revolutionary stand the Social-
ist Labor Party had taken, and the oppositionists of all shades.
There were indeed many shades to the opposition faction.
Some of them claimed that the attitude of the Socialist Labor
Party toward trade unions was correct, but that it was pre-
mature to sever connections with the old trade unions and to
set up a Socialist union. Others, again, claimed that Socialism
was sure to come in a decade and to bother with labor unions
was superfluous,all economic organizations of the workers
were out of date. Another shade maintained that the Amer-
ican Federation of Labor was all that could be expected...”
|
|
| 9 |
 |
“... electing the editor, but it was clearly stated in
the sti^lation made that if any disagreement between the Na-
tional Executive Commitee of the Socialist Labor Party and
the Publishing Association should arise the members of the...”
|
|
| 10 |
 |
“... party organs,that was too
much even for a capitalist judge sitting in a capitalist court to
endorse; such a precedent could not be established.
The kangaroos were in desperate straits. Everything they
undertook turned out as their midnight attack upon the party
headquar^rs had turned out-a failure. In the cities outside
ot New York where attempts were also made to capture the
party organizations and their belongings, they fared no better.
In Cleveland, Chicago, Milwaukee, Indianapolis, everywhere
their kangaroo attempts were frustrated.
Party Weathered the Storm
At that time I was sent by the New York State Executive
Committee on a trip to visit all Sections in the state. Roches-
kangaroos predominated.
They had their most precious Frank Sieverman in Rochester,
who had opposed the Socialist Trade and Labor Alliance at
he na lonal convention of 1896. Sieverman boasted at that
w ? "konnsr from within in the Boot and
Shoe Workers Unionhow successful can be judged today by
e...”
|
|
| 11 |
 |
“... comments on, I. 44-46; final disposition
of, 47.
Daily People, launching of the, I. 26, II. 82; troubles resulting
from, I. 29-30; De Leons editorials in, 95-96, II. 83; devo-
tion and sacrifices in behalf of, II. 85; defense of Moyer,
Haywood, and Pettibone by, 119-120.
Daily People Killers League, II. 94.
Damm, Peter, II. 94.
Darling, Joseph, anecdote of Flower, De Leon, and, I. 98.
Davis cigar shop strike, II. 78-82.
Debs, Eugene V., I. 53-54; popularity secured by, in Pullman
strike, II. 50-52; and the Socialist Labor Party, 52-53;
Social Democracy of America organized by, 53; vote polled
by, as Presidential candidate of Social Democratic Party
(1900), 82-83; Industrial Union Manifesto signed by, 107;
hopes raised by speech of, in New York, for I. W. W., Ill;
De Leon and, speakers at same meeting, 112-113; desertion
of I. W. W. by, 119; nominee of Socialist Party for Presi-
dent (1908), 149.
De Leon, Daniel, reminiscences of, by Henry Kuhn, I. 1-84;
description of, in...”
|
|
