regarded by Guild Socialists and others nowadays as a recent discovery—­is alluded to:  indeed the modern syndicalist doctrine was anticipated:  the workman, it is said, “has been forced to sell himself for a mess of pottage and is consequently deprived of the guidance of his own life and the direction of his own labour.”  Socialist opinion abroad, it says, “has taken shape in two distinct schools, Collectivist and Anarchist.  English Socialism is not yet Anarchist or Collectivist, not yet definite enough in point of policy to be classified.  There is a mass of Socialist feeling not yet conscious of itself as Socialism.  But when the conscious Socialists of England discover their position they also will probably fall into two parties:  a Collectivist party supporting a strong central administration, and a counterbalancing Anarchist party defending individual initiative against that administration.  In some such fashion progress and stability will probably be secured under Socialism by the conflict of the uneradicable Tory and Whig instincts in human nature.”

It will be noticed that even in this period of turmoil the Society was altogether constitutional in its outlook; political parties of Socialists and Anarchists combining progress with stability were the features of the future we foresaw.

By this time the Society was thoroughly aware of its relation to international socialism, and the remaining six pages of the tract are occupied by expositions of the alternatives above alluded to.  “Collectivism” is summarised from Bebel’s “Woman in the Past, Present, and Future,” and is a somewhat mechanical scheme of executive committees in each local commune or district representing each branch of industry, elected by universal suffrage for brief periods of office and paid at the rate of ordinary workmen; and of a central Executive Committee chosen in like manner or else directly appointed by the local Communal Councils.  The second part consists of “Anarchism, drawn up by C.M.  Wilson on behalf of the London Anarchists.”  This is a statement of abstract principles which frankly admits that “Anarchists have no fears that in discarding the Collectivist dream of the scientific regulation of industry and inventing no formulas for social conditions as yet unrealised, they are neglecting the essential for the visionary,”

This tract was never reprinted, and, of course, it attracted no attention.  It was however the first of the long series of Fabian tracts that aimed at supplying information and thus carrying out the original object of the Society, the education of its members and the systematic study of the reconstruction of the social system.

The spring of 1886 was occupied with arrangements for the Conference, which was held at South Place Chapel on June 9th, 10th, and 11th.

Here again a quotation from Bernard Shaw’s “Early History of the Fabian Society” is the best description available:—­

   “THE FABIAN CONFERENCE OF 1886.