At the congress of the English Trapes Unions in Liverpool 
(September 1890) '!° the National Council of the Belgian workers’ 
party invited the Trapes Unions to the international congress which 
is to be held next year in Belgium. 

The Belgians were given a mandate by the Possibilist Congress 
to convene an international congress in Belgium. The Marxist 
Congress (I employ this designation for brevity’s sake) only gave 
them the mandate to convene a congress in cooperation with the 
Swiss; the place of the congress remained unspecified. 

Short of a deliberate misunderstanding, the Belgians have 
therefore invited the Englishmen to the Possibilist Congress, the 
only one which they had a mandate to convene on their own. And 
the English accepted enthusiastically. 

It will be impossible to make the young Traves Unions of simple 
manual workers see that their good faith has been abused; that 
there will be two congresses in 1891, a good one and a bad one, 
and that it is the bad one which they have promised to attend. 
This is not simply my personal opinion; it is also the opinion of 
people who worked harder than anyone to get the Trapes Unions 
to enter the international movement. The campaign which the 
Sozialdemokrat waged against the English friends of the Possibil- 
ists''' in 1889 could not be repeated this time with the same 
success. If there are two congresses, why did the others not invite 
us also, so that we could have made our choice? Now it’s too late. 
That is what these practical men will say. They have accepted the 
Belgians’ invitation and they will go to the congress which is to be 
held in Belgium. That is absolutely certain; unless the Belgians 

The International Workers’ Congress of 1891 73 

and the Possibilists repel them by committing some unequalled 
stupidities; but they will not commit these stupidities. 

This situation is the inevitable consequence of the mistakes 
committed by the Marxist Congress. The most important question 
was left unresolved—that of the future congress. Even worse, any 
solution was rendered almost impossible in that the convening was 
entrusted to two national committees, Belgian and Swiss, without 
whose prior agreement even the smallest step could not be 
taken—the surest way of ensuring that nothing would be done. 
And again, just as after the conference at The Hague,’” the 
Belgians, instead of staying within the limits of the mandate given 
to them, acted purely in their own interests. They wished to make 
sure that the congress was held in Belgium, and they are 
convening it, without worrying about their Swiss co-mandatees. I 
have no wish to cast doubt on the sincerity and good intentions of 
the Belgian National Council; but, in practice, by the course of 
action which it has chosen, it is managing the affairs of the 
Possibilists at our expense. Instead of blaming the others, let us 
recognise that we are but suffering the consequences of our own 
failings. (Do not let us blame them too much; the mandate which 
we gave them virtually invited them not to take it literally.) 

We have placed ourselves in a sort of impasse, in a situation in 
which we cannot move, whereas our rivals are acting. How can we 
escape from it? 

First of all, it is certain that new attempts will be made from 
more than one quarter to prevent the “scandal” of two rival 
working men’s congresses. We would not be able to reject these 
attempts; on the contrary, if there is a repetition of the “scandal” 
it is in our greatest interest to ensure that the responsibility falls 
on the Possibilists and their allies. Anyone who has the slightest 
experience of the international movement knows that in the event 
of a split he who provokes it, or appears to provoke it, is always in 
the wrong in the eyes of the workers. Therefore, in the event that 
there are two congresses in 1891, let us act in such a way that it is 
not we who can be accused of being the cause. 

If it is certain that these attempts to effect a union will be 
made—should we await them passively? Then we would be 
running the risk that at the last minute the Possibilists and their allies 
might present us with an ultimatum full of traps (such as we are 
familiar with)—traps hidden beneath soothing verbiage, so that the 
general public should not see any harm in it, whilst we would not 
be able to accept; this, then, is the fine situation facing us: either 
accept and walk into the trap with eyes wide open, or refuse and 

carry the blame, in the eyes of the workers, for having brought 
about the collapse of the socialist union by sheer, inexplicable 
obstinacy! . 

In a word, the situation is quite intolerable. We must escape 
from it. How? By acting. Let us no longer sit back and rely on the 
mandate given to the Belgians and the Swiss—let us take the 
matter into our own hands.* 

Would the union of the two congresses be a regrettable thing as 
far as we are concerned? Let us examine the question. 

We may count, for certain, on 1) the French Collectivists''* and 
Blanquists (the latter reduced by the large numbers that deserted 
to the Boulangist camp''*), 2) the Germans, 3) the Austrians, 
4) the Spanish socialists, 5) the “revolutionary” Danes,! '/; of the 
Danish socialists, 6) the Swedes and perhaps some Norwegians, 
7) the Swiss, 8) the banished Russians and Poles. 

The rival congress would comprise 1) the French Possibilists, 
2) the English Trapes Unions, which would be represented en masse, 
and the English Sociat Democratic Feperation, which has profited 
from the general upswing of the movement in England, 3) the 
Belgians, 4) the Dutch, 5) the Spanish trade unions from Barcelo- 
na, etc., 6) probably the Portuguese trade unions, 7) the Italians, 
8) the “reformist” Danes, */; of the socialist mass in Denmark, 
who might attract a few Norwegians, too. 

According to circumstances the Belgians and the Dutch would 
come along to be represented at our congress also; on the other 
hand, the Swiss would be capable of sending some delegates to the 
Possibilist congress. 

It follows that this time the Possibilists would have a much 
more respectable army than in 1889. If we have the Germans, they 
will balance them with the English, lost to us by our inaction and 
clumsiness; as for the others, they have as many nationalities as 
we, if not more. And with their skill in inventing mandates and 
fictitious representatives they would leave us a long way behind. 
Let us add that if we carry on with the system of inaction 
implemented hitherto, the blame for the split would certainly fall on 
us, which would cause a further reduction in the strength of our 
congress. 

Let us now suppose that the merger has taken place. Then our 
strength will be swollen by all those who up to the present have 
been neutral because of the “scandal” of the split: the Belgians, 

4 The following six paragraphs up to the words ‘What are for us the 
indispensable conditions” are crossed by a vertical line in the manuscript.— Ed. 

The International Workers’ Congress of 1891 75 

the Dutch, the Italians; they will inevitably attract the new English 
Traves Unions, formed out of excellent elements, still pliable but 
well intentioned and intelligent. We have already taken root there; 
the contact of the French Collectivists and the Germans would be 
enough to bring them still closer to us, all the more so as the 
S.D.F., whom with its overbearing airs they find repugnant, is the 
pledged ally of the Possibilists. The Belgians only want congresses 
where they can take the lead and which the Possibilists have 
procured for them, particularly a big congress at Brussels. If we 
help them to bring about a merger in their country, the Flemish, 
who are the better element in their ranks, will side with us and will 
balance the Possibilist tendencies of the Bruxellois. The Dutch are 
fanatically keen on a merger, but they are far from being 
Possibilists. ; 

What are for us the indispensable conditions? 

1) That the joint congress should be convened by the two 
countries mandated by the two congresses of 1889. The Belgians 
will convene in the name of the Possibilist mandate, and the 
Belgians and the Swiss jointly in the name of our mandate, form 
to be determined. 

2) That the congress should be its own master. The rules and 
regulations, agendas and resolutions of the preceding congresses 
do not exist for it. It makes its own rules, the method of checking 
the mandates, and its agenda without being bound by any 
precedent. No committee, whether appointed by one of the 
preceding congresses, or during the course of the merger 
negotiations, has the right to bind the congress in all matters. 

3) The terms on which the various working men’s associations 
are to be represented, and their proportions, will be laid down 
beforehand (definite proposals are desirable, it is not up to me to 
lay them down). 

4) A committee whose composition remains to be decided will 
be instructed to draft plans for the rules, the checking of 
mandates, and an agenda, on which points the congress will make 
the final decision. 

1890 manuscript 

Works, First Russian Edition, Vol. XVI, : ; . : 
Part II, Moscow, 1936 Published in English for the first