Resolution of the General Council on the Expulsion of Gustave Durand from the International Working Men’s Association

Translated from the English by Karl Marx

_Der Volksstaat_, No. 83,
7 October 1871

Resolution of the General Council
of the International Working Men’s Association
of 7 October 1871.

Whereas the General Council is in possession of irrefutable proof that Gustave Durand of Paris — goldworker, ex-delegate of the goldworkers on the committee of the Paris trade union societies, ex-battalion chief of the National Guard, ex-chief cashier of the Ministry of Finance under the Commune, at present a refugee in London — has served and still serves the French police as a spy upon the General Council of the International Working Men’s Association and upon the refugees of the Commune present in London; that he has already received the sum of 725 francs for these services as a spy:
for these reasons the said Gustave Durand is branded a traitor and expelled from the International Working Men’s Association.
This resolution is to be made known in all the organs of the International Working Men’s Association.

London, 9 October 1871.
By order of the General Council:
Karl Marx,
Secretary for Germany.

418

Friedrich Engels
Resolution of the General Council on the Expulsion of Gustave Durand from the International Working Men’s Association

Translated from the English, taking into account the French text version

_La Plebe_, No. 122,
19 October 1871

International Working Men’s
Association.

London, 13 October.
Citizen Editor of _La Plebe_.

The General Council has charged me to send you the enclosed resolution, with the request that you publish it in the columns of your esteemed journal.
Accept my most distinguished greetings.
FEDERICO ENGELS
Secretary for Italy.

Resolution
of the General Council.
(Sitting of 7 October 1871.)

The General Council, having incontestable proof that Gustave Durand of Paris, journeyman _bijoutier_, member of the International, ex-delegate of the _bijoutiers_ to the Federal Chamber of the Workers of Paris, ex-chief of a battalion of the National Guard, ex-chief cashier of the Finance Delegation under the Commune, at present residing in London as a refugee, has served and still serves the French police, spying upon the refugees of the Commune in London, and above all upon the General Council of the International, and that he has already received the sum of 725 francs for these services of his;
declares the said Gustave Durand infamous and expels him from the International Working Men’s Association.
True copy
FEDERICO ENGELS.

419

Karl Marx
Declaration of the General Council on Nechaev’s Misuse of the Name of the International Working Men’s Association

International Workingmen’s Association.

The Conference of the Delegates of the International Workingmen’s Association, assembled at London from the 17th to the 23rd September 1871, has charged the General Council to declare publicly:

That Netschajeff has never been a member or an agent of the International Workingmen’s Association;

that his assertions to have founded a branch at Brussels and to have been sent by a Brussels branch on a mission to Geneva, are false;

that the above said Netschajeff has fraudulently used the name of the International Workingmen’s Association in order to make dupes and victims in Russia.

14 October, 1871 By order of the General Council
etc.

420

Italian translation of the Resolution of the General Council on the Expulsion of Gustave Durand from the International Working Men’s Association.
_La Plebe_, Lodi, No. 122, 19 October 1871

Karl Marx
Declaration of the General Council on the Usurpation by Nechaev of the Name of the International Working Men’s Association

Probable translation from the English by Friedrich Engels

The Conference of Delegates of the International Working Men’s Association assembled in London from 17 to 23 September 1871 has charged the General Council to declare publicly

That Netschajeff has never been either a member or an agent of the International Working Men’s Association.

That he lied in declaring that he had founded a branch in Brussels and that he had received from a Brussels branch a mission to Geneva.

That the said Netschajeff has usurped and exploited the name of the International Working Men’s Association to make dupes and victims in Russia.

423

Karl Marx
Resolution of the General Council on the Statutes of the French Section of 1871
adopted at the sitting of 17 October 1871

INTERNATIONAL WORKING MEN’S ASSOCIATION,
256, HIGH HOLBORN, LONDON. — W.C.

Resolution
Sitting of the General Council of 17 October 1871
To the Citizen Members of the French Section of 1871

Citizens,
In view of the following articles of the administrative resolutions voted by the Basle Congress: Art. 4 “Every new section or society that is formed and wishes to form part of the International must immediately announce its adhesion to the General Council”:

Article 5 “The General Council has the right to admit or refuse the affiliation of any new society, group, etc.”:

The General Council confirms the Statutes of the French Section of 1871 with the following modifications:

I. That in Art. 2 the words “Prove his means of existence” be struck out, and that it simply read: to be admitted as a member of the Section it is necessary to present guarantees of morality, etc. —

Art. 9 of the General Statutes says:

“Whoever adopts and defends the principles of the International Working Men’s Association may be received as a member. Each branch is responsible for the integrity of the members it admits.” (Every branch is responsible for the integrity of the members it admits).

In doubtful cases a section may well obtain information on the means of existence as a “guarantee of morality”, while in other cases, such as that of refugees, workers on strike, etc., the absence of proof of means of existence may well be a guarantee of morality. But to demand that candidates prove their means of existence as a general condition for admission into the International would be a bourgeois innovation contrary to the letter and spirit of the General Statutes.

| 424

1° Considering that Art. 4 of the General Statutes says:

The Congress elects the members of the General Council with power to add to their number; (The Congress shall appoint the members of the General Council, leaving to the latter the right to add new members);
that consequently the General Statutes recognise only two modes of election for the members of the General Council, either their election by the Congress or their nomination by the General Council; that the following passage of Art. 11 of the Statutes of the French Section of 1871 “One or several delegates shall be sent to the General Council” is therefore contrary to the General Statutes, which give no branch, section, group or federation the right to send delegates to the General Council.

That Art. 11 of the Regulations prescribes: “each Section is free to draw up its own particular Statutes and Regulations in conformity with local circumstances and the laws of its country; but they must in no way be contrary to the General Statutes”.

For these reasons:

The General Council cannot admit the afore-mentioned paragraph of the Statutes of the “French Section of 1871”.

2° It is quite true that the different sections existing in London had been invited to send delegates to the General Council, which, in order not to infringe the General Statutes, has always proceeded in the following manner:

It first determined the number of delegates to be sent by each Section to the General Council, reserving to itself the right to accept or reject them according as it judged them fit for the general functions it has to fulfil. These delegates became members of the General Council not by virtue of the delegation they had received from their section, but by virtue of the right which the General Statutes grant to the Council to add new members to its number.

Having functioned until the decision taken by the last Conference both as the General Council of the International Working Men’s Association and as the Central Council for England, the London Council found it useful to admit, outside the members it added directly, members delegated in the first place by their respective section.

One would be strangely mistaken in wishing to assimilate the mode of election of the General Council of the International Working Men’s Association with that of the Paris Federal Council, which was not even a national Council appointed by a national Congress, as for example the Brussels Federal Council and the Madrid Federal Council.

The Paris Federal Council being merely a delegation of the Paris sections, the delegates of these Sections could well be invested with an imperative mandate vis-à-vis a Council where they had to defend the interests

425

Karl Marx

of their section. The mode of election of the General Council is, on the contrary, determined by the General Statutes, and its members could accept no other imperative mandate than that of the general Statutes and Regulations.

3° The General Council is prepared to admit two delegates from “the French Section 1871”, under the conditions prescribed by the General Statutes and never contested by the other sections existing in London.

III In Art. 11 of the Statutes of the “French Section of 1871” appears this paragraph: “Every member of the section undertakes not to accept any delegation to the General Council other than from his section.”

Interpreted literally, this paragraph could be accepted, since it would merely say that a member of “the French Section of 1871” must not present himself to the General Council as a delegate of another section.

But taking into consideration the paragraph that precedes it, it has no other meaning than completely to change the composition of the General Council and to turn it, contrary to Art. 3 of the General Statutes, into a delegation of the London sections, where the influence of the local groups would substitute itself for that of the whole International Working Men’s Association.

This meaning of the cited paragraph of Art. 11 of the Statutes of “the French Section of 1871” is fully confirmed by the obligation it imposes to opt between the title of member of the Section and the function of member of the General Council.

For these reasons the General Council cannot admit the above-mentioned paragraph as contrary to the General Statutes and as depriving it of its right to recruit its forces everywhere in the general interest of the International Working Men’s Association.

IV The General Council is convinced that “the French Section of 1871” will understand the necessity of the proposed modifications and will not hesitate to bring its particular Statutes into conformity with the letter and spirit of the General Statutes and Regulations, and that it will thus prevent any discord which, in the present circumstances, could only hamper the ascending movement of the International Working Men’s Association.

In the name and by order of the General Council, the corresponding secretary for France, greeting and equality

Auguste Serraillier.

426