The Daily Worker Newspaper, May 24, 1930, Page 6

York City, all chec! Square, New Address and Page Six fahed by the Comprodatly Publishing Co; Ine. Rare Tey, N.Y. Telephone Stuyvesant ‘16 to tke Daily Worker. 28 Gaily, except Sunday 8. Cable: CITLOW AT PHILADELPHIA CONVENTION OF LLG.WU. HE opportunist Needle Trades Worke has pub- licly taken up the defense yw and his speech at the I. L. G. U. ention in 8 ed in the market, 1925. In a leaflet these people deliberate falsific quoted? Gitlow s made are a isn’t the speech aised by the ‘ion. was neve F reactionary A. F. of L. officialdon The Daily Worker is glad to quote the speech and give to all workers the full details surround it. This will make clear that aign against the Union is only t al culmination of a line that has been long in preparation. The Philadelphia Convention in 1925 wa historic importance to the entire revolution- ary trade union movement. At that time the left-wing had reached a point where, leading ity of the members in the union, ht-wing bureaucracy in con- t either had to ec of class col- ecisive turn in the direc- y unions, One or » the main line of policy. convention was the y of compro- most 5 was of avast ma, rig ficials on their basi; or make a the poli ; in forcing t wing, which had At the Crossroads. ue was presenting itself in many in- dustries, and it was but natural that in the needle trades, where the left wing was strong- est, the dividing line should be reached earli- est at a crucial moment, when the left wing by taking up a clear and decisive policy, could have swept all before it. Instead of tak- ing advantage of this situation, however, the left wing had forced upon it an outdated policy, which was here degenerated into plain Musteism, into class collaboration covered with “left” phrases. Everyone will remember that 1924 and 1925 was the period of mass expulsions of revolu- tionary workers from the A. F. of L., the turn- ing point of social-reformism into fascism. In the needle trades this process assumed a particularly extensive character. The majority of members were expelled, locals 2, 9 and 22 especially, by the Sigman administration. ‘The bureaucrats soon found out, however, that they had expelled themselves, for the masses were solidly with the left-wing Action Committee. The bureaucrats therefore made a retreat, a maneuver in order to gain a more favorable moment for an attack. It is under such cir- cumstances that the Philadelphia Convention occurred and Gitlow made his speech. When the convention opened, the Sigman gang controlled the offices of the International Union, and thereby had organized a “majority” of the delegates by representation from non- existing “paper” locals. The left wing dele- gates, however, represented 90 per cent of the membership and completely controlled the most important market, New York. If we accepted Sigman’s artificially created “majority” as Tegal, the rest would be simple for Sigman and the forces he represented. ~- Bowed to Paper Majority. Under tHe Lovesionian policy of staying in the A. F. of L. at all costs, the left wing came into the convention upon the basis of accepting Sigman’s “majority” as legal, fighting only to put across some democratic reforms, such as proportional representation, etc. Sigman’s ob- jective was to show at this convention that (1) he still rules the International Union, (2) has the full support of the A. F. of L., and (3) to demoralize the left wing as much as possible. In spite of the Lovestone policy, the fight in the convention tended to assume the natural ‘orms that the left wing, the main body of the union, should break through the artificial legality of Sigman, that the actual relation- ship of forces among the membership must come into collision with the ‘legality’ recog- nized by Lovestone and Gitlow. This contra- diction between policy and reality undermined tha fighting firmness of the left wing dele- gates, and Sigman took full advantage of this. Here we come to the point where opportunist policy, bad enough, is reinforced with oppor- tunist corruption, in the person of Mr. Ben- jamin Gitlow, at present the leader of the ren- egades from Communism and defended by the “opposition-” in the Needle Trades Workers In- dustrial Union. It was about the third or the fourth day of the convention when, through the instrument- ality of Sigman, the regular procedure was laid aside in order to pass a resolution demanding the release of Gitlow, who was serving the remainder of his sentence to Sing Sing, of about a year. Very soon the word was spread through the convention that Sigman, together with Moskowitz (Tammany labor expert of Governor Smith) were working to get Gitlow released during the time of the convention. Smith, Tammany’s governor, was then in New York City in his hotel suite, and trips were made to and from. Sigman Needed Gitlow. Why all this eagerness of Sigman in behalf of Gitlow? Did not Sigman just a few weeks before cause the arrest of our most active rank and filers? It did not take long to disclose the purposes of “liberal” Sigman, quite clearly indeed! In the middle of the convention, when the sfight was at its hottest, word went through the convention that Gitlow was released! Git- low was on the way to the convention! Mos- kowitz must have worked quite fast. How gen- erous, how liberal, was our Tammany gover- nor, to pardon “Comrade” Qitlow so quickly! The left wing leadership in Philadelphia looked high and low for Gitlow, so as to ap- praise him of the situation in the convention, that he might in his appearance help the left wing fight. But Gitlow was not to be found! For two days the left wing hunted Gitlow. Fin- ally Gitlow appeared—escorted by Sigman, Dubinsky & Co. to the platform of the con- vention! So, Sigman knew where he was, if the left wing did not! How kind for the bureaucrats to give this roya] reception to Gitlow! This “love” for political ‘prisoners was ° positively touching! . ‘No sooner on the again so “generous,” ion platform than Sigman, suspended the order of Wey DAS | time . ess to give “Brother” Gitlow the floor. erybody, including the right wing, cheered vociferously. Yes, the convention was united! How touching! But—but—listen to Gitlow! “It is a great honor to stand on this plat- form to address you. Why? Because the In- ternational has one of the most enlightening histories for the workers in this country. You have engaged in memorable struggles in the interests of the workers.” Voice of Gitlow, Words of Sigman. There was the stillness of death in the con- vention. On the faces of the right wing lead- ers could be seen the stealthy grins of delight at this praise from the “leader” of the left wing. Did not Gitlow know that the history of the International had for two years been a history of life-and-death struggle between the officials and the membership, with a majority of the members expelled from the union? Didn’t Gitlow know that the Sigman “major- ity” in this convention was a weapon to over- throw the real majority in the union? Of course he knew it; he was outside of jail when the main mass struggles were going on. But listen further to Gitlow: This organization cannot ‘be split, this or- ganization cannot go backward, this organiza- tion will face the future and will meet the future as it was able to meet the past.” (Our emphasis.) Vociferous applause from the right wing! Chilly consternation among the left wing. These words of Gitlow were the slogans of Sigman! Listen further to Gitlow: “I will close my speech not at all worried by what is taking place at this convention.” So, Mr. Gitlow knew what was taking place in the convention, and was not worried by it. Sigman was worried, the left wing was wor- ried, because a bitter struggle for the whole future of the industry was going on. But Gitlow assured Sigman, who was shouting “anity and discipline” in the convention to bol- ster up his artificial majority, that there was nothing to fear. Gitlow declared that the left wing would not “split,” that it would submit to Sigman. And really, if the Communist Par- ty, in the name of which Gitlow spoke, agreed to unity on the basis of Sigman’s majority, then surely Sigman had nothing further to worry about. But listen even further to Gitlow: “When the gavel goes down for the last + you will go into the work of your organization with an energy, with a devotion, and a love, that will tackle the most difficult problems . . . and you will work for the unification of the labor movement . . . so that the United’ States with its wealth and glory should belong to the working class.” Peace—With Sigman. So, after the convention there was to be no more struggle against the bureaucracy, only sweet peace and “unity,” the harmony of “love”! Unity with Sigman, “devotion” to Sigman, ‘love” for Sigman, all under the rule of Sigman established by the rottenest kind of falsehood and manipulations! At the conclusion of Gitlow’s speech, the right wing gang threw their hats into the air, acclaiming Gitlow. Dubinsky, black lieutenant of Sigman, moved that the speech be printed— and it was! Next day the “Forward” carried it with Gitlow’s picture on the front page! The capitalist press reported: “Gitlow’s speech throws consternation among Reds.” For lack of space, we have been forced to pass over many rich spots in Gitlow’s speech. Every needle worker should read it again, ob- tain back copies of the “Forward” for that pur- pose. The left wing was so shamed and chagrined, that it tried to hush the matter up at that time. It was a typical labor-faker’s speech, and fitted exactly into the needs and desires of the right wing leaders, the Tam- many machine, and the employers. To the Right of Green. It is interesting to note that Wm. Green, of the A. F. of L., also made a speech at this convention, And his speech was far “to the left” of Gitlow’s. William Green even “praised” the left wing, as the “salt of the earth”—al- ways providing, of course, that it followed Gitlow’s line of “unity and discipline” under Sigman and Green! There are two possible explanations of Git- low’s speech: one is, that it was simply an extreme application of the opportunist policy of staying within the A. F. of L. at all costs, the other is that Gitlow was paying a debt agreed upon for his release from prison. As for us, we think Gitlow acted quite consciously according to an agreement. Whatever the motive of Gitlow, the result was the same. Sigman pounced like a tiger upon the left wing. The peace agreement was called “a scrap of paper,” the police were brought into the convention. Hyman, spokes- man of the left wing, was told by Sigman to “get his hat and coat and get to hell out of the convention.” Under this provocation the left wing acted spontaneously by leaving in a body. Sigman’s first weapon thereupon was Gitlow’s speech. Sigman said: “When Gitlow was through with his talk I thought that perhaps his pupils at this con- vention would take the advice of their spokesman and I expected that at the next session such audacity would not again be displayed. I said to him, ‘Brother Gitlow, I wish your comrades would understand you.’” They Understand Now! itlow’s speech absolutely destroyed the pos- sibility, which existed up to that moment, of the left wing taking over the leadership of the 1.L.G.W.U. at the Philadelphia convention. Gitlow was speaking in the name of the Com- munist movement, as one of its most prom- inent spokesmen, To repudiate Gitlow at that moment would have split the left wing itself wide open. It was impossible at that time to even criticise Gitlow, without, endangering the unity of the left wing. Only now, that Gitlow has severed himself from the movement, has exposed himself all along the line as an op- portunist of the first water, and an enemy of the working class, has it become possible to expose his treachery in all its nakedness for the workers in the needle trades, Demand the release of Fos- ter, Minor, Amter and Ray- mond, in prison for fighting for unemployment insurance, — at 26-28 Onion DATWORK.” Union Square. New York, N. ¥, Baily <2z Worker Central Organ of the Communist Party of the U. S. A. A yaa a SUBSCRIPTION RATES: y er By mail everywhere: One year $6; six months $3; two months $1; excepting Boroughs of ps) Maubattan and Bronx, New York City, and foreign, which are: One year $8; six months $4.50 - 1 Fight the Southern Bosses’ Death Threat! By FRED ELLIS By BILL DUNNE. HE marked extension of the activities of the Musteite elements in the labor movement, the increased efforts of the socialist party lead- ership to penetrate the existing unions and secure influence in recent strikes, as a result of the growing leftward swing of masses of workers, makes necessary the paying of far more attention to the exposure of the social fascists and more concrete achievements in the organization of united fronts from below—rank and file committees of action, rank and file strike committees, the inclusion of wider sec- tions of workers in the unemployed councils, more attention to economic demands. The capitalist class, faced with continually rising discontent of the working class result- ing from the economic crisis, is giving much leeway to the social fascists. No better ex- ample of this fact can be cited than the ten- der solicitude the New York City capitali press shows from the speeches and statements of Norman Thomas. It is principally through the capitalist press that workers are informed that there are three political parties of capital- ism in the U. S. But it is particularly in economic struggles that social fascism is making efforts to secure leadership and keep the developing movements, many of them of a spontaneous character, from assuming a militant character and adopt- ing genuine class programs. In such struggles the Musteites and socialist party elements are found closely united with the fascists of the A. F. of L. leadership against the Communists and the class struggle unions. Role of the U.M.W.A. In Illinois the Musteites, with Fishwick, Farrington and Walker in full control of the Springfield faction of the U.M.W.A., work under instructions of the Peabody Coal Com- pany which protects them since they are, it must be admitted, able to do a better job of fooling the miners and sabotaging their strug- gles than Lewis can in this important field. This is the sole reason for their toleration by the Peabody interests. This support costs the Peabody company nothing since the dues and assesments are checked off the scanty wages of the working miners and gives it a line of defense against the militant National Miners Union. Powers Hapwood was reecntly allowed to speak over station WEBQ, Harrisburg, Ill., for more than an hour and a half, delivering a denunciation of Lewis, an organization appeal for the Springfield faction, eulogizing Howat, Germer and Walker. In this speech, which is published in the Il- linois Miner for May 17, there is not one word of denunciation of the coal barons, of their methods, of their government. It is quite clear that the coal owners of Il- linois are only too willing to have Lewis, their former agent, saddled with all the blame for their past and present drives against the miners and their living standards, and welcome the opportunity to enlist the services of the social fascists at no cost to themsglves. Musteite and the Capitalist Courts. More than this—the Musteites, with McAl- lister Coleman as the link with the New Leader, official organ of the socialist party, doing pub- licity work for the Springfield faction, are consciously deceiving the miners by telling them that the capitalist courts are on the side of the miners, that struggle is not necessary. Speaking of Lewis the same issue of the II- linois Miner mentioned above says in a first page editorial: “Legally and morally he has not a leg to stand on. Every court decision has been against him and will continue to go against him to the end... “Of course, if the case of the reorganized U. M. W. of A. was no better than that of Lewis, they could only meet bullets with bul- lets, booze with booze, and blackjacks with blackjacks. . . .But why resort to the methods of pirates... .when the court can settle Mr. Lewis as they certainly will in a very short New Forms, Methods of Struggle in the Fight on Social-Fascism time? So keep your shirts on, boys... .’ (My emphasis). Since when have the courts of this country given guarantees of protection to unions that are determined to organize workers and lead their struggles for higher living standards? The answer is never—and in this case such protection has been given and promised in re- turn for guarantees that the social fascists will fight Communists but not coal barons, Musteism in the Anthracite. That the Musteite elements has some follow- ing in the anthracite section of the industry and is carrying on some activity is shown by the program adopted by Local Union 250 of Lattimer, Pa., distributed to the delegates to the recent Hazelton Tri-District convention of the W.M.W.A. The demands in this leaflet, such as point 6 which calls for the calling of general strikes after the continuation of dis- crimination against workers lasting over five days, six-hour day, five-day week, the presence of mine committees when new work is started in any colliery, opposition to arbitration, oppo- sition to the check-off, etc., undoubtedly reflect the attitude of the rank and file. Point 14 pays: “Advocate the socialist party in the unions.” James Dailye, one of the signers of this leaflet and secreary of the local union, is a former national board member of the National Miners Union. The membership of the “reorganized U.M. Ww. is more militant than the leadership. Two miners were fired recently by the Lone Star Coal Company near Pittsburg (Kan.). The Illinois Miner in its issue for May 17 gives, in ; Sorb the surplus of the farm ful fight of the proletariat for increased wages | its two column head over the story, a very il- luminating insight into .the Howat-Germer- Walker policy: “Two Miners Discharged at One Pit—Men Vote to Walk Out in Indignation; President Howat Says Strikes Are Not Encouraged, But Wherever Men So Decide, Organization Will Back Them to Limit; But Any Reprisals Against Bosses’ Assistance to Lewis Will Be Voluntary.” (My emphasis). Coal operators must come out openly for Lewis before the Musteites even speak to miners about struggle and then the whole re- sponsibility is placed by these “leaders” upon the workers. Open Alliance. In the South, where the struggle is sharper, the Musteites in the U.T.W. are openly aligned with the A. F. of L. fascists, The Birmingham (Ala.) Labor Advocate, the official organ of the A.F.L, central labor council, which called on March 15 for fascist action against organ- izers for the Trade Union Unity League, gives full support to the Musteites and emphasizes their company union program. Paul Smith, Southern organizer for the A. F. of L. recently went to the secretary of the Southern Manufacturers Association and asked him to agree to finance an issue of 5,000 La- bor Advocates—to make this contribution to the struggle against Communist. In the trial of Freeman Thompson, president of the N.M.U., in Springfield, Ill., last week, in which he and 14 others were convicted for organizing and leading the strike of 10,000 miners last December, a Musteitee sub-district president appeared as a state witness. The jury was selected and organized by undercover agents of the ePabody Coal Company. Social Fascists in the Taxi Drivers’ Strike. ‘An the strike of New York City and Brook- lyn taxi drivers the socialist party elements are also.active. The New York Leader for May 17 reports gleefully: “During the first few days of the strike men from the Communist Trade Union Unity Leaguee attempted to speak to the men but were all “kicked out.” “Wednesday evening... .August Claessens spoke to the men and was favorably received. Thursday the strikers invited Norman Thomas to speak. The socialist leader addressed the strikers again Monday.” In the strike of taxi drivers in Pittsburgh, | Pa., he real leadership and advisory board was On the By ERIK BERT. On the Alliance Between the Prole and the Poor Farmers. Draft Program 107) points IL. Ve E ruary, p. Feb- inevitable disparity between the production and the con- (The Communist, out the sumption of agricultural products. The con- clusion drawn is as follows: “Obviously, little or no outlet can be found under capitalism for ever-growing production except the reactionary outlet of imperialist war. If, however, the city proletariat by struggle can compel the employing class to pay higher wages this would help to absorb the surplus; while if the masses overthrow capitalism and socialize industry, increased de- mand for food and clothing would take up all the farm surplus now choking the market, since we must by no means imagine that the proletarian masses in the cities have either enough to eat or to wear. It is upon this ba: that an alliance between the poor farmers and the revolutionary city proletariat should be built for a joint fight against capitalism, the small farmers aiding the proletariat both in wage struggle and the revolutionary over- throwal of capitalism, the establishment of a Soviet Government of Workers and Farmers.” (Our emphasis.—E. B.) This would indicate that to the extent that the fight of the proletariat in the present per- iod for increased wages is successful—to. that degree will these increased wages help ab- | The succe: will help to solve the agricultural eri within the capitalist system. It is on this basis that the united front of proletariat and poor farm- ers against finance capital is to proceed, ac- cording to the program, “It would be a big mistake,” as the Draft Program for Negro Farmers (The Communist, March, p. 251) points out, “to cherish illusions concerning the possibility to improve the position of the small and partly the middle farmer under capitalism. On the contrary, the chief object of our agitation and propaganda is to explain to the broad ma: of small and partly the middle farmers the process of their ruin under | capitalism.” It is just such illusions that the excerpt from the Agricultural Draft Program quoted above might foster. : Further on in the Agricultural Draft Pro- gram it is pointed out that the bourgeois solu- tion of the farm problem is expulsion of vast numbers of farmers from the farms. The line of the Program is thus: “The Communist Party proposes to restore solvency * not only to agriculture, but to the agricultural popu- lation as well, by abolishing capitalism and socializing the agricultural as well as other industries.” (The Communist, February, p. 107.) The line of the Draft Program, as outlined in the excerpt which we have quoted above (p. 6), however, seems to indicate that not only will “solvency” be restored to agriculture after the revolution * but that possibilities of increasing “solvency” exist in the present per- iod of the general crisis of world capitalism and in particular in the present period of the agrarian crisis in the United States. All other things being equal, it is almost a truism that if the American proletariat receives increased wages, it will spend an increased amount on agricultural products and that this will help reduce the surplus. It must be pointed out that this will help reduce the surplus. It must be pointed out that all other things are not going to remain equal and that consequently these abstract logical conclusions will not fol- low. In the first place the surplus of agricul- tural products is a world surplus, particularly for cotton and wheat, the two predominant cash crops of the American farmer. This sur- plus is tending to increase. The rapid growth of exports of American agricultural machin- ery ** will accelerate this growth and ill reduce the cost of production outside of the Agricultural Draft Program United States and hence prices on the won market. In > second place the increased! use of a machinery will tend to increase the domesti¢ surplus. (The increase resulting from the increased use of machinery will be counter-balanced to only a minor de- gree by such decreases in production as may be concomitant with the expulsion of sections of the American agricultural population from the land.) In view, therefore, of the increas- ing world surplus (the immediate cause of the present depression in Argentina, Australia, and Canada—to mention only the outstanding non-domestic examples) and the probable growth in the domestic surplus through the increased use of agricultural machinery, the decline in the surplus which would result from increased wages for the proletariat would be only relative in character—it would be a de- cline in relation to an increased surplus, * The use of “solvency” to describe th post-revolutionary situation— when finance capital and its institutional corollaries and its exploitation of the agricultural m s have been abolished—might be noted as inadequate. * The following series will illustrate this growth. Sales Billed for rms). Agricultural Machinery Export (56 — 90.2 1927 — 163.6 i — 86.0 1928 — 244.3 ‘ — 1929 — 808.9 (51 Firms) 1926 Standard Trade and Securities Service, Standard Statistical Bulletin, 1930-1931 Base Book Issue, p. 177. Whether there would absolute decrease or not is impossible to state. It seems quite improbable at least. In any event it seems clear that it is on no such basis that the “alliance between the poor farm- ers and the revolutionary proletariat should be built for a joint fight against capitalism.” The Draft Program recognizes this in that it points out that “the general forms of struggle can be seen to be such as tenants’ strikes, mass refusal to pay mortgages or interest upon them, taxpay strikes and a physical struggle against foreclosure.” (The Commu- nist, April, p. 372.) The basis of the alliance between the proletariat and the poor farmers is the fact that “of all the classes that stand face to face with the bourgeoisie today, | inally result a net proletariat alone is a really revolutionary class. . . . The lower middle-class, the small manufacturer, the shopkeeper, the artisan, the nt, all these fight against the bourgeoisie, to save from extinction their existence as frac- tions of the middle cla: They are, therefore, not revolutionary, but conservative. Nay more, that are reactionary, for they try to roll back the wheel of histo If by chance they are revolutionary, they are so, only in view of their impending transfer into the proletariat, they thus defend not their present, but their future interests; they desert their own standpoint to place themselves at that of the proletariat.” (Communist Manifesto, p. 26.) “The attitude of the proletariat to the small and, largely so, to the middle farmers, should be to establish an alliance with them and lead them. This specific inter-class relationship, without eliminating the class distinctions, is based on a community of interests against the big landlords and big capitalists.” (Draft Pro- gram for Negro Farmers, March Communist, p. 248.) The alliance between the proletariat and the poor farmers is based on the fact that the interests of both are antagonistic to the exploitation of finance capital and on the fact that the proletariat through its avante garde offers to the poor farmers a consequent and unfaltering leadership which erystalizes their antagonism into revolutionary forms. It is not based on the possibilities of partial absorption of the farm surplus through the increased wages which the proletariat is able to tear from the capitalist class, made up of “Father” Cox, of the National Catholic Welfare Council, assisted by a prot- estant minister, Day, Crambers, a university professor who represents the Civil Liber’ Union and is closely associated with the Mu ites. Their activities, which ended in th being sold out, were sympathetically reported by one McDowell, Federated Press correspond- ent, a former theological student who has re- cently joined the socialist par Role of the C. P. . Our greatest weakness in against these elements is that ov the industries—inside the industri: too narrow and weak. Our shop papers not numerous enough to do more than make our Party and the class struggle unions known to workers in a few spots. While there is general agreement as to the vital necessity for extending working inside the industries as yet this finds little expression in the every.day work. One cannot escape the impression that large numbers of workers in the heavy industries upon whom the burden of rationalization, unemployment and part time work is becominé unendurable, while agreeing with our program as they know it from our general agitational activity, are waiting to see how we will—and if we will—apply it to the struggles which they know they must wage. In other words, workers want to see us in action in the industries, to see our program and leadership put to the test of struggles or- ganizing in the shops and factories around their economic demands. Delay in taking the lead in these struggies, of preparing workers for them, opens the door for the social fascists whose olfactory nerves are delicately attuned to the smell of oppor- tunities for betrayal. One must not discount the need for theo- retical exposure of the social fascists in the struggle against them. But this by itself will not destroy their influence among workers whose dire need for leadership leads them to accept the honey-coated phrases of the Muste- ites without much critical examination. The exposure and defeat of social fascism ean be carried successfully only by the rapid broadening of our work inside the industries. The struggle must be carried on by our com- rades who, in the work inside the industries and among the decisive sections of the working class, establish Communist leadership and who can expose the social fascists on the basis o concrete deeds with which workers are familiar. The establishment of rank and file commit- tees of action and systematic work for the election of rank and file strike committees in all struggles must replace all attempts of the class struggle unions to rally workers for seri- ous struggle under the narrow leadership of the official union committees. The growing activity of the Musteites, in it~ self proof of the will to struggle of the work- ing class, demands the practical carrying out of the tactic of the united front from below— the building of committees of struggle of rank and file members of A.F.L. unions, of unor- ganized workers, of workers still under the in- fluence of the socialist party. To underestimate the importance of need for continual emphasis upon new forms and meth» ods of struggle. of constant efforts to break through the old narrow official forms, is tw surrender sections of the working class to 10+ cial fascism. The Deily Werker is the Party’s hest instrument to make contacts among ike masses of workers, to build a mass Communist Party. Workers! Join the Party of | Your Class! Communist Party U. S. A. 43 East 125th Street, New York City. i, the undersigned, want to join the Commu- Send me more information, nist Party. Name .. AddreSS ..sssecseeesseemecees Ult¥ssercveen Occupation. v.ccervscccwscececesss Ag@sednen Mail this to the Central Office, Communist Party, 43 East 125th St.. New York, N. ¥,