After the settlement, by a compromise in structure, of the conflict between the anarchists and the collectivists, the Society entered a period of calm, and the Executive issued a circular complaining of the apathy of the members.  Probably this is the first of the innumerable occasions on which it has been said that the Society had passed its prime.  Moreover, the Executive Committee were blamed for “some habits” which had “a discouraging effect” on the rest of the Society, and it was resolved, for the first, but not the last time, to appoint a Committee to revise the Basis.  The Committee consisted of the Executive and eight added members, amongst whom may be mentioned Walter Crane, the Rev. S.D.  Headlam, and Graham Wallas.  It is said that after many hours of discussion they arrived by compromise at an unanimous report, and that their draft was accepted by the Society without amendment.  The report was presented to a meeting on June 3rd, 1887, of which I, on a visit to London, was chairman.  It is unfortunate that the record of this meeting, at which the existing Basis of the Society was adopted, is the only one, in the whole history of the Society, which is incomplete.  Possibly the colonial policy of the empire was disturbed, and the secretary occupied with exceptional official duties.  Anyway the minutes were left unfinished in June, were continued in October, and were never completed or recorded as confirmed.  The proceedings relating to the Basis were apparently never written.  There is no doubt, however, that the Basis was adopted on this occasion, it is said, at an adjourned meeting, and in spite of many projects of revision it has with one addition—­the phrase about “equal citizenship of women”—­remained the Basis of the Society to the present time.[20]

The purpose of the Basis has been often misunderstood.  It is not a confession of faith, or a statement of the whole content and meaning of Socialism.  It is merely a test of admission, a minimum basis of agreement, acceptance of which is required from those who aspire to share in the control of a Society which had set out to reconstruct our social system.  The most memorable part of the discussion was the proposal of Mr. Stuart Glennie to add a clause relating to marriage and the family.  This was opposed by Mrs. Besant, then regarded as an extremist on that subject, and was defeated.  In view of the large amount of business transacted before the discussion of the Basis began, the debate cannot have been prolonged.

It is easy enough, nearly thirty years later, to criticise this document, to point out that it is purely economic, and unnecessarily rigid:  that the phrase about compensation, which has been more discussed than any other, is badly worded, and for practical purposes always disregarded in the constructive proposals of the Society.[21] The best testimony to the merits of the Basis is its survival—­its acceptance by the continuous stream of new members who have joined the Society—­and it has survived not because its upholders deemed it perfect, but because it has always been found impracticable to put on paper any alternative on which even a few could agree.  In fact, proposals to re-write the Basis have on several occasions been referred to Committees, but none of the Committees has ever succeeded in presenting a report.