How far the fact of the working classes being at
war with the proprietary classes justifies them
in suspending the observance of the ordinary social
obligations in dealing with them was never settled;
but at that time we were decidedly less scrupulous
than we are now in our ideas on the subject; and
we all said freely that as gunpowder destroyed the
feudal system, so the capitalist system could not
long survive the invention of dynamite. Not
that we are dynamitards: indeed the absurdity
of the inference shows how innocent we were of any
practical acquaintance with explosives; but we thought
that the statement about gunpowder and feudalism
was historically true, and that it would do the
capitalists good to remind them of it. Suddenly,
however, the Federation made a very startling practical
application of the Class War doctrine. They
did not blow anybody up; but in the general election
of 1885 they ran two candidates in London—Mr.
Williams, in Hampstead, who got 27 votes, and Mr.
Fielding, in Kennington, who got 32 votes.
And they made no secret of the fact that the expenses
of these elections had been paid by one of the established
political parties in order to split the vote of the
other. From the point of view of the abstract
moralist there was nothing to be said against the
transaction; since it was evident that Socialist
statesmanship must for a long time to come consist
largely of taking advantage of the party dissensions
between the Unsocialists. It may easily happen
to-morrow that the Liberal party may offer to contribute
to the expenses of a Fabian candidate in a hopelessly
Tory stronghold, in order to substantiate its pretensions
to encourage Labour representation. Under such
circumstances it is quite possible that we may
say to the Fabian in question, Accept by all means;
and deliver propagandist addresses all over the place.
Suppose that the Liberal party offers to bear part
of Mr. Sidney Webb’s expenses at the forthcoming
County Council election at Deptford, as they undoubtedly
will, by means of the usual National Liberal Club
subscription, in the case of the poorer Labour candidates.
Mr. Webb, as a matter of personal preference for an
independence which he is fortunately able to afford,
will refuse. But suppose Mr. Webb were not
in that fortunate position, as some Labour candidates
will not be! It is quite certain that not the
smallest odium would attach to the acceptance of
a Liberal grant-in-aid. Now the idea that
taking Tory money is worse than taking Liberal money
is clearly a Liberal party idea and not a Social-Democratic
one. In 1885 there was not the slightest excuse
for regarding the Tory party as any more hostile
to Socialism than the Liberal party; and Mr. Hyndman’s
classical quotation, ’Non olet’—’It
does not smell,’ meaning that there is no
difference in the flavour of Tory and Whig gold
once it comes into the Socialist treasury, was a sufficient
retort to the accusations of moral corruption which
were levelled at him. But the Tory money job,