The Daily Worker Newspaper, September 17, 1932, Page 4

Worker’ | Jeniet Porty USA the Comprodally Publishing Co., Inc., daily exexept Sunday, st 50 E. York Oity,N. ¥. Telephone, ALronquin 4-208. Cable “DAIWORK.” jecks to the Daily Worker, 50 E, 18th St, New York, N. ¥. SUBSCRIPTION RATES: @ year, $6; six. months, $3; in and}Bronx,,New York City. ‘sixbmonths, $4.50. The Bosses’ Program for the Winter-Starvation TF WORDS would feed anyone, then Hoover’s prediction (it was not so much a promise) that “no man, woman, or ] ll go hungry during the approaching winter,” should amply supply the vast millions of starving workers—now awaiting the first frost of oncoming winter, without food, without shelter, without warm clothing. cynical hypocrisy of Hoover’s speech at the opening | of his so-called: “Welfare and Retief Conference” would | shame anyone but the devil himself. It is enough that New- | ton D. ker and other democratic party leaders join with Toot gg masses to suffer and die in silence. * two months, excepting Foreign: ene year, $8; The to compel the sta * * d alone,” quoth Mr. Gifford, head of the Telephone Telegraph Co., when the conference had luxurious Mayflower Hotel, where these parasites could rich and costly foods—certainly not “bread alone.” already laid that down as an ideal. What the is not bread, but “character building.” Such was cond “task” of those he enumerated for “the country.” Of oover' course “the country” must not be confused with the national government, he warned The government has no duty at all toward the starving only duty it has is to pour billions of dollars into the laps’ : road magnates and stock exchange brokers. “maintain the bedrock principle of the nation’s liberties,” says Hoover's third “task,” the presidential spok-sman of the capitalist class s the “full mobilization of local resources and responsibilities.” Which probably means the full mobilization of the police force to aid Jandlords in evictions and prevent starving workers and farmers from taki food to saye themselves from perishing. “Each is his brother’s keeper,” said Hoover’s final point, again re- minding us that the devil of capitalism (the only devil we know) can still quote scripture. Also reminding us that Hoover and the whole capi- talist class resolutely decline to “keep” their “brothers” of the working class, and insist on a Mayflower Hotel diet themselves, while rejecting their responsibility to give even one child one crust of bread. * * * HE “local communities” upon which the Hoover-Democratic “confer- ence” would shove the responsibility to force the employed —them- selves starving from wage cuts and the stagger system of “work-sharing” —to bear the burden of “giving to their neighbors,”—will undoubtedly be the scene of battle between the authorities serving as watchdogs of wealth and the starving masses determined to fight for bread. * Against the speech of Hoover, the spokesman of capitalism, the work- ers must take up the weapon of William Z. Foster’s Chicago speech of September 10th for a united struggle of all workers, farmers and impov~ erished masses against starvation. Foster’s speech is meant for all who suffer under capitalism. Jt was a call to action for all who toil to get together and act. Against Hoover's hypocritical plea that the government can do nothing because it is “broke,” Foster declares that no government is broke while it “has under its jurisdiction the enormous accumulated wealth of the capitalist class.” “There is plenty for all,” declared Foster, the Communist Party can- Hidate against Hoover for president, and adds: “¥f the organized and unorganized workers, workers of the A. F. of L. and of the Socialist Party, Negro and white workers, native and for- eign-born, will join together in common struggle irrespective to which political party they adhere, they can win their demands.” And Foster gives a list of seven demands, the second of which dir- fectly deals with immediate relief to the unemployed: “Not one unemployed worker or his family without decent housing, food and clothing. Fifty dollars winter relief from the Federal treasury for each unemployed worker plus ten dollars for each dependent, in ad- dition to local relief. Stop the evictions of unemployed workers from their homes.” * * * ESE demands, as well as the demand for unemployed insurance at the cost of the government and the employers, can be won by the united struggle of the workers as Foster stated. "The trick of Hoover to evade federal responsibility and to make the local capitalist authorities responsible for holding down the starving masses must be met first of all by resolute and militant mass struggle, united action of all workers, regardless of political affiliation, to fight |Ham Fish- | Wall St. Rele starvation that capitalism forces upon them. Letters from Dear Comrade: I want to point out some short- comings which are taking place every day in meetings. Here are some incidents. Three months ago, while I was looking for a job at the Downtown Employment Agencies, I attended an open air meeting held by the Socialist Party. Some comrades there were asking the speaker ques- tions about the Hillquit Soviet oil case, about the Socialist Party tak- ing the class struggle off its con- stitution, etc, For a time the speak- er was up against it; he couldn't. answer the questions and the work- ers began to laugh at him, so that he changed the subject and started to speak about the trade unions, pointing out that the Communist Party broke up the ILGWU here in New York and the UMWA, the backbone of the American Labor Movement. To my disappointment the comrades present kept quiet and the crowd left after the meet- ing with the wrong impression that the Communist Party is interested only in politics. “Difficult Question” About 4 or 5 weeks ago I attended another meeting in Union Square, eonducted by the Communist Party, with a very good speaker, who an- swered the questions promptly and well. But again came a difficult question. “Why is the Communist Party changing policy every month in the Trade Union field?” Our comrade answered as follows: “The Communist Party changed its pol- icy according to the situation.” ‘That's all. This may be correct as to immediate tactics but it is not | to the basic and general line of tactics, but no worker under- stood what he meant. He should have explained this very important question and called upon the work- ers to join the TUUL and expose the A.F.L. leaders, socialists, etc., who are selling out the workers every day. I am sure that the speaker was not acquainted with the Trade Uniony Here is. still more evidence about the ignorance of the question of the trade unions. At Columbus Circle there are all kinds of fakers, Love- Btoneites, Trotskyites, Anarchists, Bte., every night busy speaking to about 1,000 or more workers. This correct as time the chairman announced that Section 2 of the Communist Party would explain the Election Cam- paign. Although this was the sixth the Communist Party had presage of Naga workers around ning very atientively. Pn 9 od ion period came 1ut question for Our Readers the speaker. “Why did the Com- munist Party a few years ago have the policy to bore from within the A. F. of L. and to amalgamate all craft unions and build industrial | unions? Then in 1929 the same | Communist Party started to build | new unions, dividing the workers’ organizations, and particularly the unions?” The speaker answered that he did not know anything about the old policy; but he knew that today the only ones fighting for the working class are the Communists, That's all. Suggests Articles I suggest that the Daily Worker start a series of articles, like the Gorki and the Red Singer articles, on the History of the Trade Unions and the role of the Communist Party in different periods, coming up to today, exposing concretely all the fakers in the unions, including the Lovestoneitse and Trotskyites, and also explain the United Front. Comradely, E. ROSEN. hm The above letter of a non-Party worker reveals a bik weakness in the werk of agitation of the Party and at the same time shows that trade union work, the building up of the revolutionary unions which is a key task of the Party, and the building of opposition groups has not been taken hold of by the Party with the firmness that the situation demands The instances given show | also that our agitators are not suf- | ficiently prepared on how to treat the problems of trade union work. Very often our speakers do not know how to properly connect up | political and economic | questions and therefore do not fully expose the agitation of the socialists that we Communists are interested in the day to day struggle but solely in the | revolution, whereas the Communist |Party is-the only party that really fights the day to day struggles and defends the interests of the workers against the atacks of the capitalists, linking it up with the struggles for the overthrow of capitalism by means of which exploitation and oppression will finally be abolished. The socialists and renegades of all shades do not defend the day to day interests of the workers, but betray them. They do this because they are not working class, but anti-working class bodies, because they are op- posed to revolution and serve the capitalists who are straining .every nerve to restore their shattered sys- tem at the expense of the working- class.—Editor’s Note, ‘Petty Graft, WASHINGTON SWINDLE SHEET, by William P. Heim. A. & C. | Boni, publishers, Reviewed by VERN SMITH HEN the Fish Committee start- ed out to “hunt the Reds”, drive Amtorg from the country, ‘lay the basis for the Dies Bill and a war on the Soviet Union, they got $25,000 from Congress and the free use of all federal spies, secret ser- vice agents, ete They spent some-of the money for revolvers and cartridges; some- | body was sitting there armed to the teeth while Olgin was testifying for the Communist Party in New York. While Gannes, acting editor of the Daily Worker, was proving to the committee that the workers support this paper, some congress- man squinting at him had his hand on the butt of a Smith & Wesson or a Colt. CORN FLAKES ARE EXPENSIVE! The rest of the> money went largely for hotel bills. Fish was de- fending religion, and presumably he had read that part of the bible which says: “Thou shalt not muzzle the ass which treadeth out the corn.” Well, there was no muzzle on a red-hunting congressman when he lapped up his corn flakes in the Hotel Commodore, New York, at the rate of $988.94 for a few days’ stay for the five. Three of the congressmen took a little trip from New York to probe Camp Nitgedaiget, for three hours. There is no record they bought anything there, but their official expense ac- count shows it cost them $144.80 for the trip. A worker can make it by bus for $3, round trip, and any- way, the two state troopers they had along probably carried the congressmen in their car, free. At the Olympic Hotel, the best in Seattle, the corn flakes cost $101.40. At the Hotel St. Francis, the most stately in San Francisco, they cost $242.67, At the swanky Hotel Alex- andria in Los Angeles, they splurg- ed $195.80. Then the congressmen came back to New York and spent $215.09 more at the Commodore. No, the red hunters were not muzzled. FROM SWORN EXPENSE ACCOUNT. Helm is concerned with quoting from official expense accounts what, in view of Teapot Dome and the $100,000 bribe to Fall, must be considered the “chicken feed” of graft. It is all about how Senator Sheppard of Texas loots the trea- sury of $366.84, and Senator Hiram Johnson of California knicks it for $1,018.04, charges for “mileage” over and above what the railroad fare really amounts to. It is full of roaringly funny tales of how Senators Walcott of Con- necticut, Hawes of Missouri, Pitt- man of Nevada, Norbeck of South Dakota, and McNary of Oregon blew in $27,000 on a little picnic trip to “investigate wild animal life” in the late summer of 1930. At the Royal York Hotel in To- ronto it cost $265.57 for two days— hunting wild animal life. Walcott, Pittman, Hawes and a special in- vestigator, Shoemaker, spent $200 it oy for a fishing trip on Crane re, WHILE MILLIONS GO HUNGRY. ‘They stocked up heavily on what their expense account solemnly as- sures you was “mineral waters”, and after the first day out, the mineral waters so much got the best of them that they had to sleep it off for nearly two days. But they recovered in time to buy more mineral waters. This took place, as Helm him- self points out, “at a time of na- tional distress and privation, a time when ragged and hungry millions yainly sought nourish- ment, when women and children, ill nourished and worse clad, cried for food and shelter; when there was at least one bread line in every city of the land and when those who begged food in the winding lines were numbered by the hundreds of thousands.” ONLY THE PETTY THIEVERY. Apparently, at least Helm gives incident after similar incident, most of the senators and congress- men get in on these “fishing trips” about ever so often. But all of them, $125 a session for “station- ery” and take it, though the com- mittees they belong to really give them their stationery. But you can buy desks and beds and engraved Christmas cards on the $125, and what you don’t spend you get in cash- Hoover gets an allowance for running the White House, in ad- dition to his $75,000 a year salary. He raised the expenses for the White House by just about one- third in his first year in office, so that it stands now at $445,693 @ year. Other presidents got along with one private secretary at $10,- 000; Hoover must have three at a total of $30,000 a year. And this in a period of unemployment when “economy” is the watch word of Mr, Hoover—that is, “economy”— wage cuts of federal workers, for everybody but Hoover. And not a @ent for the jobless. TYPICAL OF CAPITALIST RULE, Helm’s book of 249 pages is full of that, all taken from official ex- pense accounts: It’s interesting and it shows a certain atmosphere. This stealing of five and ten thousand dollars at a time, strictly legal stealing, for the government makes the laws, is trivial compared with what must go on in the dark, ille- gally. But it goes some part of the way to prove the character of the highest officials in the United States government. It bears about the same relation to real impor- tant graft that stealing pennies does to horse stealing. But if any- one will steal the pennies off a dead man’s eyes, you can’t trust him with anything. Hoover’s “Relief” Speech! - F Sela By J. BURCK. (Special Correspondent of the Daily Worker at the World Congress Against War held at Amster- dam on August 27-29, 1932) “WHY, this is not a congress, it’s @ mass meeting!” exclaimed a correspondent of a liberal journal at our press table, The exclamation came in the midst of an ovation which the 2,200 delegates gave the Japanese vet- eran of the revolutionary labor movement, Comrade Sen Kataya- ma. It was one of the most mov. ing moments of this dramatic, pas- sionate world-wide “mass-meet- ing”, The delegates burst forth with the “Internationale”, the German delegation (750 strong) thundered out the “Rote Front” salute and the rest of the delegates joined in, Kat. ayama made an attempt to speak, but the delegates kept up the ova- tion and again sang the “Interna- tionale” with much fervor, Tom Mann presided and made a speech of tribute to the veteran revolu- tionist. Throwing “parliamentary pro- ceedure” to the dogs, Willi Muen. zenberg (prominent German Com- munist, head of the Workers In- ternational Relief) jumped to the “mike” and galvanized the audi- ence with his glowing praise of the old Japanese labor leader. Vaillant Couturier, French proletarian writ- er and one of the editors of L’Hu. manite, French Communist daily, did likewise. And when Katayama finally spoke, the delegates sat spellbound despite the fact that the Japanese revolutionist spoke in the language of the minority, English, “WAR AGAINST IMPERIALIST WAR” ‘There were many such moments at the World Congress Against War, and if one were to express the content of the Congress in terms of mass enthusiasm, of mili- tant will, the result would be a thousand-fold outcry in alk, the languages of the world: | “V.cr against imperialist war!” But in the face of the substantial results of the Congress, its spirit and color are of secondary impor- tance. One must, of course, turn to the minutes of the Congress and | the texts of the leading speeches | for an adequate appraisal of its meaning, but some of the high. lights may here be noted, First of all, it was apparent that the Congress embraced all ele- ments of sincere and honest war opponents the world over, It is an irony, indeed, that the Soviet dele- gation was absent, but its absence was more than conspicuous: the delegates were in a state of high in- -dignation against the Dutch gov. ernment which had refused to al- low Gorky, Shvernik and the rest of the Soviet delegation to enter Holland, The impudent actfon of the Dutch government came as a shock to the pacifists. It was a vivid illustration of the imperialist attitude to war and to the Soviet Union. Whatever one may say of the pacifists, there is a ‘growing conviction among them that the Soviet Union is the only country that conducts a sincere peace poli- cy and has offered a sincere and effective program of disarmament, 95) 9h el [UCH against their will the bour- geois correspondents and the skeptics among the bourgeois dele. gates were forced to admit that the Congress was not a “Commu- nist affair,” The ten. Trotskyites were an exception, but of them lat- 4 Delegates at the Congress” er. In the foreground of the Con- Gress were more intellectuals and non-Communist “big shots” than Communists, In the presidium, in the leading committees and in the Congress as a whole the Commu. nists constituted a minority of about 30 per cent, Among thé 30,- 000 organizations represented there were hundreds of outspoken paci- fist bodies and thousands of organ- izations that usually are outside the sphere of influence of the Commu- nist parties in their countries, Out. standing individuals from all parts of the world have emphasized by their participation in the campaign for the Congress its international and inter-party character. THE VIEW POINTS EXPRESSED But more important and convic- ing than all this was the fact that over four hundred social democratic delegates were elected to the Con- gress over the heads of the leaders of the Second International and the Amsterdam (Yellow) Interna- tional. The united front of the working class from below has found a substantial expression at the Congress, In France, in Germany and in other countries some of the strongest socialist and reformist sections elected delegates, and the comrades of those countries tell me that the social_fascist leaders are in a state of panic because of this mass “disobedience,” In the welter of ideological cur- rents that have found expression at the Congress one can see a num- ber of common points of contect. All of the delegates are at one in their conviction that the danger of @ new world war is real and near; all are united in their opposition to war and all of them have come to the Congress with the realiza- tion that the League of Nations with its “disarmament” conferences will not prevent a new world war, Practically all of the delegates will agree that it is the capitalist cys- tem that breeds wars, though here an important exception must be noted, Valabhay Patel, former pres. ident of the All-India National Congress, had his own thesis to offer on the cause of war, At the Amsterdam Congress Patel played a prominent if not a leading role. His Position of leadership in the na- tional .emancipation movement of India naturally won for him a prominent place at the Congress, both at the open sessions and in the Resolutions Committee. Patel’s thesis may pe summed up about as follows: The main cause of war is imperialism and the defi- nition of imperialism is domina- tion of one nation by another, The focus of world-imperialism is India, The overthrow of the British rule in India would of itself lead to the “liberation of all colonial peoples and would even do away with the danger of an imperialist attack upon the Soviet Union. Patel's en- ergetic language, his flaming con- demnation of war, his sharp de- nunciation of the League of’Na- tions and its hypocritical “peace” moneuvers sounded strong and “revolutionary” and made a pro. found impression on} the delegates, But Patel’s thesis limps’ on both legs with respect to two basic Points, (1) His thesis implies a fun- Anti-War Meet in Amsterdam By NATHANIEL BUCHWALD eo Workers Majority of? damental difference between capi- talism and imperialism and a dé- nial of the proposition that capi- talism is the basic cause of war, (2) It substitutes for the slogan of defending fhe U.S.S,R, the slogan of mobilizing the masses’ of the world for the defense of India” against British imperialism. “Over. throw the British rule in India and the danger of war against the So- viet Union as well as the war of Japan against China will disap- pear, The freedom of the colonial masses the world over would fol- low the qownfall of British impe- rialism in India.” This is what Pa. tel insisted upon, In private con- versations he stated plainly that he was no socialist or Communist and that‘his main concern was—the na- tional emancipation of India, Within the framework of a free India he was for a system modeled along the lines of capitalist so- ciety, $e Oe 'T the Congress Patel was a pic. turesque figure. He was clad in white with trousers fitting tightly around his calves and wore a white skull-cap. His snow-white beard lent an added shade of brown to his earnest face. After a long de- bate in the Resolutions Committee Patel accepted the Manifesto and at the concluding session of the Congress made a lengthy state. ment explaining his indorsement of the document, Except Patel, no one had to of- fer anything like a thesis that would be in contradiction to the manifesto, The Trotskyites were the only “agin”-ers, but their oppo- sition consisted of obstructionist and’ disruptive tactics more than of program, In the face of the im. pressive symptoms of a united front from below, the Trotskyites kept shouting about the necessity of adopting united front tactics and viciously minimized the results al- ready achieved, THEIR “UNITED FRONT” ‘The real meaning of their dem- agogic speech-making was a veiled call for a united front with the Second International rather than with the masses of the social.dem- ocratic workers, Their 10 votes were the only ones cast against the manifesto, and their 10 voices were the only ones attempting to dis- rupt the Congress. They were given every opportunity to state their views, and this circumstance de- prived them of the opportunity to pose as martyrs. During the sec- ond session one of the Trotskyites attempted to'address the Congress from the floor. The chairman re. fused to recognize him and the Trotskyites. thought they had a good chance to make a row, They did make a row shouting at the top of their voices that opinion was be- ing suppressed at the Congress, but the chairman took the wind out of their sails by stating that any dele- gate could get the floor if only he notified the presidium in advance, The Trotskyite soon after did mount the platform to make a speech but the mass of delegates: would not let him speak, and it was only at the earnest insistence of the chairman and others of the presidium that the delegates let the renegade have his say, A similar episode occurred on the next day when Molinier, a French Trotskyite who said he rep- resented the Greek war veterans, was given the floor, The delegates booed him long and earnestly and the chairman had a hard time JOHN GAVRO A STORY OF MINERS’ LIVES AND STRUGGLES By EMIRY BALINT. SYNOPSIS The author, a revolutionary writer, tells how he came to Volaf, Pennsylvania, to help the striking miners there. He meets John Gavro, one of the strikers, who introduces him to the rest. The miners crowd around to describe the situation. wus (Installment I.) Another tried to defend the strike breakers, and he made a dejected gesture because there was no re- lief. They vied with one another in recounting their troubles. ee There was no leadership! They did not understand why.they did not picket their own mine every morning instead of number ten, six miles away. I tried to explain to them that for the present all the forces must be concentrated there because that was the company’s most important mine, and if we succeeded in bringing that mine down, this one would come down by itself. Everybody know this, but those who were inclined to be strike breakers looked for excuses. This inclination must be driven out of them, if not by persuasion, then by clubs and stones, I said. $a eet ye ‘HEY still complained. Three days ago the strike leaders and the whole relief com- mittee were arrested; all the worth while men were among thm, and since then, everything had been topsy-turvy. The strike could not get on their feet again. Nobody had faith in the new relief commit- tee. They were helpless. And this manifested itself in the picket lines too. Yesterday there were fewer on the line, and today ,out of the cus- tomary two hundred there weren't even forty. NO RELIEF FOR TWO DAYS What was at the bottom of it all was that there had been no re- lief for two days. One of the sniveling kids tugged at his mother’s skirt. His mother slapped him, and he burst into tears. The rest of the children be- gan to cry too. Hunger. Destitution. Despair. “There is no leadership, that’s the main trouble,” the men said. John Gavro whispered to me that tomorrow morning maybe nobody would go to picket, but instead they would go into the company’s office for work. A woman pushed aside two or three miners ,and elbowed her way up to me. She wanted to talk to me right away. She held an eight or nine year old little girl with one hand, and setting down in front of her the pail which she held in her other hand, she rolled up her sleeve over her right forearm, and said to me in Hungarian: “Listen! . .. With this arm, I've already knocked down four strike- breakers on the embankment, the . other day. I have three kids at home, and here this one hangs on to me. This big brat!” and she shook the thin arm of the pale child, “Look here, on my head, ‘Do you see that lump? It’s from the blackjack! My husband is home, He was hit by a stone, and my kids want to eat too. If you can’t give us any relief, then let’s not say another word about the strike; I myself will chase my husband down into the mine, lame leg and all, And then don’t anybody call me a strike breaker, or I'll smack him down!” oe re eS people were hungry, ragged and depressed. One of them said that the old arrangement of groups of ten un- dey the leadership of a captain was no good an¥ more, because many of them were arrested, and many others went back to the mine. An- other said that as many as three men had told him that afternoon that. they were surely going back to work in the morning, they had already spoken to the foreman. Be- cause even if they worked twelve hours and earned only dry bread, it was better than collapsing from hunger with the family ... That’s what they said. I did not wait for five o'clock, the time for which I had originally called the meeting, because I did not think it advisable to let all these men and women grieve and complain for another hour. They depressed each other more and more, so it was hardly four o'clock when I opened the meeting. 7 8 8 S a result of the three-quarter of an hour meeting, six groups eight or ten women, children, an¢ men in each, started immediately southward towards the nearby farms. They had combed all the other places during the preceding weeks, (Gavro and five others undertook to visit the A. & P, and the other stores in town. ‘ “If they don’t give nicely, they’D give the other way.” Gavro swore. (To Be Continued) keeping them silent, At the end of his thoroughly demagogic speech Molinier thought it his duty to de. clare that “Trotsky is the leader of the ideology I have expressed in my speech.” This statement was greeted with loud laughter mixed with boos. Another Greek dele- gates jumped to his feet to state that Molinier was not elected by the war veterans, and that he rep- resented no one. Pace est Te pacifists were a distinct cat- egory at the Congress but they ‘were not organized and had no pro- gram, The old recipes of individual resistance to war, of refusal to bear arms, of educating the young gen. eration in a spirit of peace, etc., sounded hollow and pathetic in their helplessness, and found little support, Characteristic of the paci- fist current was the speech of greetings made by the well-known Swedish writer Karin Michaelis, She was greeted warmly when she mounted the platform but her speech left the delegates cold, Her recipe against war was, first, re- fusal to enter military service (con- sciencious objection) and secondly, educating the school children in a spirit of peace. Her hopes for peace were based upon the school teach. ers rather than upon the masses. The idea that the fault was with the stick and not with the hand that wields it was also part of the mental equipment of the pacifists. Disarmament as an absolute cure of war, disarmament without re- gard to the capitalist system and its contradictions and conflicts is one of the pet ideals of the paci- fists, An American rabbi who tag- ged on to the American delegation was hot and bothered about a reso- lution he had to offer calling for universal disarmament and prais. ing the Soviet Union for its sincere program of disarmament, When the American delegation drew up a memorandum to the Resolutions Committee about war preparations in the United States, about train- ing military forces for the suppres- sion of demonstrations against starvation, etc,, the rabbi made a wry face, The introduction of the element of the class struggle into the question of figh' war seem- ed to him far-fetched and extra. neous, He later, peddled his resolu- tion among individual delegates. The intellectuals came forth as individuals rather than as a group. It goes without saying that Henri Barbusse stood head and shoulders above them all, He dominated the Congress both by the magic of his name, the magetism of his person= ality and—above all—by his sober, earnest an drealistic approach to the question of fighting war, He was a leading spirit of the Con- gress, Tall, gaunt, stooped, with sunken eyes and a deathly fatigue on his olive face—he looked like a statue of sorrow as he stood on the speakers podium or sat on the plat. form, He worked very hard both in preparing the Congress ad in help- ing direct it. He spoke several times: at a press conference on the eve of the opening, at the opening of the Congress, at a mass-Meetig under the most inadequate acous- tics, at the presentation of the Manifesto and at the conclusion of the Congress. He is no orator and his dolorous monotone is tiring. But there is something in Bar- busse’s ‘voice that capivates you and holds you tense. THE INTELLECTUALS— BARBUSSE. During the first day the intellec. tuals were in the foreground, Bar- busse made a long speech, the read- ing of Re’ and’s speech (he could not attend because of illness) took up much time and the greetings by other writers and intellectuals, coupled with Patel’s long address, tended to create the ion among some of the delegates that the Congress was being monopo- lized by the intellectuals and the “big shots”, The Trotskyites tried to use this circumstance as an op= portunity to incite the delegates to protests against the “exclusion of workers”, but with no success, The next day was given over almost en. tirely to speeches by representatives of workers’ and other mass organ- izations, pete. Hira report of the Credentials Committee subsequently proved the falsity of the assertion by cyn- ics and skeptics that it was a Con- Bress of intellectuals and not of workers. Of the 2,200 delegates only 249 were intellectuals; 1,865 were workers and 72 farmers. Among the 2,200 delegates were about 800 members of Communist parties, and the Communists were the only ones who came to the Congress with a realistic conception of the task of fighting war and with a clear program. The ition Scena a aa i ae a i J