The History of the Fabian Society

By Edward R. Pease

DigiCat Publishing presents to you this special edition of "The History of the Fabian Society" by Edward R. Pease. DigiCat Publishing considers every written word to be a legacy of humankind. Every DigiCat book has been carefully reproduced for republishing in a new modern format. The books are available in print, as well as ebooks. DigiCat hopes you will treat this work with the acknowledgment and passion it deserves as a classic of world literature.

• Language: English
• Publisher: DigiCat
• Release date: Sep 16, 2022
• ISBN: 8596547358909

Book preview

Edward R. Pease

The History of the Fabian Society

EAN 8596547358909

DigiCat, 2022

Contact: [e-mail]

Table of Contents

PUBLISHERS

Preface

The Sources of Fabian Socialism

The Foundations of the Society: 1883-4

The Early Days: 1884-6

The Formation of Fabian Policy: 1886-9

Fabian Essays and the Lancashire Campaign: 1890-3

To your tents, O Israel: 1894-1900

Fabianism and the Empire: 1900-1

Education: 1902-5, and the Labour Party: 1900-15

The Episode of Mr. Wells: 1906-8

The Policy of Expansion: 1907-12

The Minority Report, Syndicalism and Research: 1909-15

The Lessons of Thirty Years

Illustrations

The

History of the Fabian Society

Chapter I

The Sources of Fabian Socialism

Chapter II

The Foundations of the Society: 1883-4

Chapter III

The Early Days: 1884-6

A MANIFESTO

Chapter IV

The Formation of Fabian Policy

1886-9

Chapter V

Fabian Essays and the Lancashire Campaign: 1890-3

Chapter VI

To your tents, O Israel: 1894-1900

Chapter VII

Fabianism and the Empire: 1900-1

Chapter VII I

Education: 1902-5, and the Labour Party: 1900-15

Chapter IX

The Episode of Mr. Wells: 1906-8

Chapter X

The Policy of Expansion: 1907-12

Chapter XI

The Minority Report, Syndicalism and Research: 1909-15

Chapter XII

The Lessons of Thirty Years

Appendix I

Memoranda by Bernard Shaw

A

ON THE HISTORY OF FABIAN ECONOMICS

B

ON GUILD SOCIALISM

Appendix II

The Basis of the Fabian Society

Appendix III

List of the names and the years of office of the ninety-six members of the Executive Committee, 1884-1915

Appendix IV

Complete List of Fabian Publications, 1884-1915, with names of authors

FABIAN TRACTS

BOOKS AND SPECIAL PAMPHLETS.

BOUND TRACTS.

FABIAN SOCIALIST SERIES.

RESEARCH DEPARTMENT PUBLICATIONS.

Index

THE END

PUBLISHERS

Table of Contents

---

Preface

Table of Contents

The History of the Fabian Society will perhaps chiefly interest the members, present and past, of the Society. But in so far as this book describes the growth of Socialist theory in England, and the influence of Socialism on the political thought of the last thirty years, I hope it will appeal to a wider circle.

I have described in my book the care with which the Fabian Tracts have been revised and edited by members of the Executive Committee. Two of my colleagues, Sidney Webb and Bernard Shaw, have been good enough to revise this volume in like manner, and I have to thank them for innumerable corrections in style, countless suggestions of better words and phrases, and a number of amplifications and additions, some of which I have accepted without specific acknowledgment, whilst others for one reason or another are to be found in notes; and I am particularly grateful to Bernard Shaw for two valuable memoranda on the history of Fabian Economics, and on Guild Socialism, which are printed as an appendix.

The MS. or proofs have also been read by Mrs. Sidney Webb, Mrs. Bernard Shaw, Sir Sydney Olivier, Graham Wallas, W. Stephen Sanders, and R.C.K. Ensor, to each of whom my cordial thanks are due for suggestions, additions, and corrections.

To Miss Bertha Newcombe I am obliged for permission to reproduce the interesting sketch which forms the frontispiece.

E.R.P.

THE PENDICLE,

LIMPSFIELD,

SURREY,

January, 1916.

---

The Sources of Fabian Socialism

Table of Contents

The ideas of the early eighties—The epoch of Evolution—Sources of Fabian ideas—Positivism—Henry George—John Stuart Mill—Robert Owen—Karl Marx—The Democratic Federation—The Christian Socialist—Thomas Davidson

Chapter II

The Foundations of the Society: 1883-4

Table of Contents

Frank Podmore and Ghost-hunting—Thomas Davidson and his circle—The preliminary meetings—The Fellowship of the New Life—Formation of the Society—Th career of the New Fellowship

Chapter III

The Early Days: 1884-6

Table of Contents

The use of the word Socialism—Approval of the Democratic Federation—Tract No. I—The Fabian Motto—Bernard Shaw joins—His first Tract—The Industrial Remuneration Conference—Sidney Webb and Sydney Olivier become members—Mrs. Annie Besant—Shaw's second Tract—The Tory Gold controversy—What Socialism Is—The Fabian Conference of 1886—Sidney Webb's first contribution, The Government Organisation of Unemployed Labour

Chapter IV

The Formation of Fabian Policy: 1886-9

Table of Contents

The factors of success; priority of date; the men who made it—The controversy over policy—The Fabian Parliamentary League—Facts for Socialists—The adoption of the Basis—The seven Essayists in command—Lord Haldane—The Essays as Lectures—How to train for Public Life—Fabians on the London School Board—Facts for Londoners—Municipal Socialism—The Eight Hours Bill

Chapter V

Fabian Essays and the Lancashire Campaign: 1890-3

Table of Contents

Fabian Essays published—Astonishing success—A new presentation of Socialism—Reviewed after twenty-five years—Henry Hutchinson—The Lancashire Campaign—Mrs. Besant withdraws—Fabian News

Chapter VI

To your tents, O Israel: 1894-1900

Table of Contents

Progress of the Society—The Independent Labour Party—Local Fabian Societies—University Fabian Societies—London Groups and Samuel Butler—The first Fabian Conference—Tracts and Lectures—The 1892 Election Manifesto—The Newcastle Program—The Fair Wages Policy—The Fortnightly article—The Intercepted Letter of 1906

Chapter VII

Fabianism and the Empire: 1900-1

Table of Contents

The Library and Book Boxes—Parish Councils—The Workmen's Compensation Act—The Hutchinson Trust—The London School of Economics—Educational Lectures—Electoral Policy—The controversy over the South African War—The publication of Fabianism and the Empire

Chapter VIII

Education: 1902-5, and the Labour Party: 1900-15

Table of Contents

Housing—The Education muddle and the way out—Supporting the Conservatives—The Education Acts of 1902 and 1903—Feeding School Children—The Labour Representation Committee formed—The Fabian Election Fund—Will Crooks elected in 1910—A Fabian Cabinet Minister—Resignation of Graham Wallas—The younger generation: H.W. Macrosty, J.F. Oakeshott, John W. Martin—Municipal Drink Trade—Tariff Reform—The Decline of the Birth-rate

Chapter IX

The Episode of Mr. Wells: 1906-8

Table of Contents

His lecture on administrative areas—Faults of the Fabian—The Enquiry Committee—The Report, and the Reply—The real issue, Wells v. Shaw—The women intervene—The Basis altered—The new Executive—Mr. Wells withdraws—His work for Socialism—The writing of Fabian Tracts

Chapter X

The Policy of Expansion: 1907-12

Table of Contents

Statistics of growth—The psychology of the Recruit—Famous Fabians—The Arts Group—The Nursery—The Women's Group—Provincial Fabian Societies—University Fabian Societies—London Groups revived—Annual Conferences—The Summer School—The story of Socialist Unity—The Local Government Information Bureau—The Joint Standing Committee—Intervention of the International Socialist Bureau

Chapter XI

The Minority Report, Syndicalism and Research:

1909-15

Table of Contents

The emergence of Mrs. Sidney Webb—The Poor Law Commission—The Minority Report—Unemployment—The National Committee for the Prevention of Destitution—Vote against the House of Lords—Bernard Shaw retires—Death of Hubert Bland—Opposition to the National Insurance Bill—The Fabian Reform Committee—The New Statesman—The Research Department—The Rural Problem—The Control of Industry—Syndicalism—The Guildsmen—Final Statistics—The War

Chapter XII

The Lessons of Thirty Years

Table of Contents

Breaking the spell of Marxism—A French verdict—Origin of Revisionism in Germany—The British School of Socialism—Mr. Ernest Barker's summary—Mill versus Marx—The Fabian Method—Making Socialists or making Socialism—The life of propagandist societies—The prospects of Socialist Unity—The future of Fabian ideas—The test of Fabian success

Appendix I

A. On the History of Fabian Economics. By Bernard Shaw

B. On Guild Socialism. By Bernard Shaw

Appendix II

The Basis of the Fabian Society

Appendix III

List of the names and the years of office of the ninety-six members of the Executive Committee, 1884-1915

Appendix IV

Complete List of Fabian publications, 1884-1915, with names of authors

Index

---

Illustrations

Table of Contents

Frontispiece, from a drawing by Miss Bertha Newcombe in 1895

The Seven Essayists

Mrs. Annie BesantFrom a photograph

Hubert BlandFrom a photograph

William ClarkeFrom a photograph

(Sir) Sydney OliverFrom a photograph

G. Bernard ShawFrom a photograph

Graham WallasFrom a photograph

Sidney WebbFrom a drawing

---

Edward R. PeaseFrom a photograph

Frank PodmoreFrom a photograph

Mrs. Sidney WebbFrom a photograph

H.G. WellsFrom a photograph

---

The

History of the Fabian Society

Table of Contents

Chapter I

Table of Contents

The Sources of Fabian Socialism

Table of Contents

The ideas of the early eighties—The epoch of Evolution—Sources of Fabian ideas—Positivism—Henry George—John Stuart Mill—Robert Owen—Karl Marx—The Democratic Federation—The Christian Socialist—Thomas Davidson.

Britain as a whole never was more tranquil and happy, said the Spectator, then the organ of sedate Liberalism and enlightened Progress, in the summer of 1882. No class is at war with society or the government: there is no disaffection anywhere, the Treasury is fairly full, the accumulations of capital are vast; and then the writer goes on to compare Great Britain with Ireland, at that time under the iron heel of coercion, with Parnell and hundreds of his followers in jail, whilst outrages and murders, like those of Maamtrasma, were almost everyday occurrences.

Some of the problems of the early eighties are with us yet. Ireland is still a bone of contention between political parties: the Channel tunnel is no nearer completion: and then as now, when other topics are exhausted, the Spectator can fill up its columns with Thought Transference and Psychical Research.

But other problems which then were vital, are now almost forgotten. Electric lighting was a doubtful novelty: Mr. Bradlaugh's refusal to take the oath excited a controversy which now seems incredible. Robert Louis Stevenson can no longer be adequately described as an accomplished writer, and the introduction of female clerks into the postal service by Mr. Fawcett has ceased to raise alarm lest the courteous practice of always allowing ladies to be victors in an argument should perforce be abandoned.

But in September of the same year we find a cloud on the horizon, the prelude of a coming storm. The Trade Union Congress had just been held and the leaders of the working classes, with apparently but little discussion, had passed a resolution asking the Government to institute an enquiry with a view to relaxing the stringency of Poor Law administration. This, said the Spectator, is beginning to tamper with natural conditions, There is no logical halting-place between the theory that it is the duty of the State to make the poor comfortable, and socialism.

Another factor in the thought of those days attracted but little attention in the Press, though there is a long article in the Spectator at the beginning of 1882 on the ever-increasing wonder of that strange faith, Positivism. It is difficult for the present generation to realise how large a space in the minds of the young men of the eighties was occupied by the religion invented by Auguste Comte. Of this however more must be said on a later page.

But perhaps the most significant feature in the periodical literature of the time is what it omits. April, 1882, is memorable for the death of Charles Darwin, incomparably the greatest of nineteenth-century Englishmen, if greatness be measured by the effects of his work on the thought of the world. The Spectator printed a secondary article which showed some appreciation of the event. But in the monthly reviews it passed practically unnoticed. It is true that Darwin was buried in Westminster Abbey, but even in 1882, twenty-three years after the publication of the Origin of Species, evolution was regarded as a somewhat dubious theorem which respectable people were wise to ignore.

In the monthly reviews we find the same odd mixture of articles apposite to present problems, and articles utterly out of date. The organisation of agriculture is a perennial, and Lady Verney's Peasant Proprietorship in France (Contemporary, January, 1882), Mr. John Rae's Co-operative Agriculture in Germany (Contemporary, March, 1882), and Professor Sedley Taylor's Profit-Sharing in Agriculture (Nineteenth Century, October, 1882) show that change in the methods of exploiting the soil is leaden-footed and lagging.

Problems of another class, centring round the Family, present much the same aspect now as they did thirty years ago. In his Infant Mortality and Married Women in Factories, Professor Stanley Jevons (Contemporary, January, 1882) proposes that mothers of children under three years of age should be excluded from factories, and we are at present perhaps even farther from general agreement whether any measure on these lines ought to be adopted.

But when we read the articles on Socialism—more numerous than might be expected at that early date—we are in another world. Mr. Samuel Smith, M.P., writing on Social Reform in the Nineteenth Century for May, 1883, says that: Our country is still comparatively free from Communism and Nihilism and similar destructive movements, but who can tell how long this will continue? We have a festering mass of human wretchedness in all our great towns, which is the natural hotbed of such anarchical movements: all the great continental countries are full of this explosive material. Can we depend on our country keeping free from the infection when we have far more poverty in our midst than the neighbouring European States? Emigration and temperance reform, he thinks, may avert the danger.

The Rev. Samuel (later Canon) Barnett in the same review a month earlier advocated Free Libraries and graduated taxation to pay for free education, under the title of Practicable Socialism. In April, 1883, Emile de Lavelaye described with alarm the Progress of Socialism. On the Continent, he wrote, Socialism is said to be everywhere. To it he attributed with remarkable inaccuracy, the agrarian movement in Ireland, and with it he connected the fact that Henry George's new book, Progress and Poverty, was selling by thousands in an ultra popular form in the back streets and alleys of England. And then he goes on to allude to Prince Bismarck's abominable proposition to create a fund for pensioning invalid workmen by a monopoly of tobacco!

Thirty years ago politics were only intermittently concerned with social problems. On the whole the view prevailed, at any rate amongst the leaders, that Government should interfere in such matters as little as possible. Pauperism was still to be stamped out by ruthless deterrence: education had been only recently and reluctantly taken in hand: factory inspection alone was an accepted State function. Lord Beaconsfield was dead and he had forgotten his zeal for social justice long before he attained power. Gladstone, then in the zenith of his fame, never took any real interest in social questions as we now understand them. Lord Salisbury was an aristocrat and thought as an aristocrat. John Bright viewed industrial life from the standpoint of a Lancashire mill-owner. William Edward Forster, the creator of national education, a Chartist in his youth, had become the gaoler of Parnell and the protagonist of coercion in Ireland. Joseph Chamberlain alone seemed to realise the significance of the social problem, and unhappily political events were soon to deflect his career from what then seemed to be its appointed course.

The political parties therefore offered very little attraction to the young men of the early eighties, who, viewing our social system with the fresh eyes of youth, saw its cruelties and its absurdities and judged them, not as older men, by comparison with the worse cruelties and greater absurdities of earlier days, but by the standard of common fairness and common sense, as set out in the lessons they had learned in their schools, their universities, and their churches.

It is nowadays not easy to recollect how wide was the intellectual gulf which separated the young generation of that period from their parents. The Origin of Species, published in 1859, inaugurated an intellectual revolution such as the world had not known since Luther nailed his Theses to the door of All Saints' Church at Wittenberg. The older folk as a rule refused to accept or to consider the new doctrine. I recollect a botanical Fellow of the Royal Society who, in 1875, told me that he had no opinions on Darwin's hypothesis. The young men of the time I am describing grew up with the new ideas and accepted them as a matter of course. Herbert Spencer, then deemed the greatest of English thinkers, was pointing out in portentous phraseology the enormous significance of Evolution. Professor Huxley, in brilliant essays, was turning to ridicule the simple-minded credulity of Gladstone and his contemporaries. Our parents, who read neither Spencer nor Huxley, lived in an intellectual world which bore no relation to our own; and cut adrift as we were from the intellectual moorings of our upbringings, recognising, as we did, that the older men were useless as guides in religion, in science, in philosophy because they knew not evolution, we also felt instinctively that we could accept nothing on trust from those who still believed that the early chapters of Genesis accurately described the origin of the universe, and that we had to discover somewhere for ourselves what were the true principles of the then recently invented science of sociology.

One man there was who professed to offer us an answer, Auguste Comte. He too was pre-Darwinian, but his philosophy accepted science, future as well as past. John Stuart Mill, whose word on his own subjects was then almost law, wrote of him with respectful admiration. His followers were known to number amongst them some of the ablest thinkers of the day. The Religion of Humanity offered solutions for all the problems that faced us. It suggested a new heaven, of a sort, and it proposed a new earth, free from all the inequalities of wealth, the preventable suffering, the reckless waste of effort, which we saw around us. At any rate, it was worth examination; and most of the free-thinking men of that period read the Positive Polity and the other writings of the founder, and spent some Sunday mornings at the little conventicle in Lamb's Conduit Street, or attended on Sunday evenings the Newton Hall lectures of Frederic Harrison.

Few could long endure the absurdities of a made-up theology and a make-believe religion: and the Utopia designed by Comte was as impracticable and unattractive as Utopias generally are. But the critical and destructive part of the case was sound enough. Here was a man who challenged the existing order of society and pronounced it wrong. It was in his view based on conventions, on superstitions, on regulations which were all out of date; society should be reorganised in the light of pure reason; the anarchy of competition must be brought to an end; mankind should recognise that order, good sense, science, and, he added, religion freed from superstition, could turn the world into a place where all might live together in comfort and happiness.

Positivism proposed to attain its Utopia by moralising the capitalists, and herein it showed no advance on Christianity, which for nineteen centuries had in vain preached social obligation to the rich. The new creed could not succeed where the old, with all its tremendous sanctions, had completely failed. We wanted something fresh, some new method of dealing with the inequalities of wealth.

Emile de Lavelaye was quite correct in attributing significance to the publication of Progress and Poverty, though the seed sown by Henry George took root, not in the slums and alleys of our cities—no intellectual seed of any sort can germinate in the sickly, sunless atmosphere of slums—but in the minds of people who had sufficient leisure and education to think of other things than breadwinning. Henry George proposed to abolish poverty by political action: that was the new gospel which came from San Francisco in the early eighties. Progress and Poverty was published in America in 1879, and its author visited England at the end of 1881. Socialism hardly existed at that time in English-speaking countries, but the early advocates of land taxation were not then, as they usually are now, uncompromising individualists. Progress and Poverty gave an extraordinary impetus to the political thought of the time. It proposed to redress the wrongs suffered by the working classes as a whole: the poverty it considered was the poverty of the wage workers as a class, not the destitution of the unfortunate and downtrodden individuals. It did not merely propose, like philanthropy and the Poor Law, to relieve the acute suffering of the outcasts of civilisation, those condemned to wretchedness by the incapacity, the vice, the folly, or the sheer misfortune of themselves or their relations. It suggested a method by which wealth would correspond approximately with worth; by which the reward of labour would go to those that laboured; the idleness alike of rich and poor would cease; the abundant wealth created by modern industry would be distributed with something like fairness and even equality, amongst those who contributed to its production. Above all, this tremendous revolution was to be accomplished by a political method, applicable by a majority of the voters, and capable of being drafted as an Act of Parliament by any competent lawyer.

To George belongs the extraordinary merit of recognising the right way of social salvation. The Socialists of earlier days had proposed segregated communities; the Co-operators had tried voluntary associations; the Positivists advocated moral suasion; the Chartists favoured force, physical or political; the Marxists talked revolution and remembered the Paris Commune. George wrote in a land where the people ruled themselves, not only in fact but also in name. The United States in the seventies was not yet dominated by trusts and controlled by millionaires. Indeed even now that domination and control, dangerous and disastrous as it often is, could not withstand for a moment any widespread uprising of the popular will. Anyway, George recognised that in the Western States political institutions could be moulded to suit the will of the electorate; he believed that the majority desired to seek their own well-being and this could not fail to be also the well-being of the community as a whole. From Henry George I think it may be taken that the early Fabians learned to associate the new gospel with the old political method.

But when we came to consider the plan proposed by George we quickly saw that it would not carry us far. Land may be the source of all wealth to the mind of a settler in a new country. To those whose working day was passed in Threadneedle Street and Lombard Street, on the floor of the Stock Exchange, and in the Bank of England, land appears to bear no relation at all to wealth, and the allegation that the whole surplus of production goes automatically to the landowners is obviously untrue. George's political economy was old-fashioned or absurd; and his solution of the problem of poverty could not withstand the simplest criticism. Taxation to extinction of the rent of English land would only affect a small fraction of England's wealth.

There was another remedy in the field. Socialism was talked about in the reviews: some of us knew that an obscure Socialist movement was stirring into life in London. And above all John Stuart Mill had spoken very respectfully of Socialism in his Political Economy, which then held unchallenged supremacy as an exposition of the science. If, he wrote, "the choice were to be made between Communism[1] with all its chances, and the present state of society with all its sufferings and injustices, if the institution of private property necessarily carried with it as a consequence that the produce of labour should be apportioned as we now see it almost in inverse proportion to labour, the largest portions to those who have never worked at all, the next largest to those whose work is almost nominal, and so in descending scale, the remuneration dwindling as the work grows harder and more disagreeable until the most fatiguing and exhausting bodily labour cannot count with certainty on being able to earn even the necessities of life; if this or Communism were the alternative, all the difficulties, great or small, of Communism would be but as dust in the balance.[2] And again in the next paragraph: We are too ignorant, either of what individual agency in its best form or Socialism in its best form can accomplish, to be qualified to decide which of the two will be the ultimate form of human society."

More than thirty years had passed since this had been written, and whilst the evils of private property, so vividly depicted by Mill, showed no signs of mitigation, the remedies he anticipated had made no substantial progress. The co-operation of the Rochdale Pioneers had proved a magnificent success, but its sphere of operations was now clearly seen to be confined within narrow limits. Profit-sharing then as now was a sickly plant barely kept alive by the laborious efforts of benevolent professors. Mill's indictment of the capitalist system, in regard to its effects on social life, was so powerful, his treatment of the primitive socialism and communism of his day so sympathetic, that it is surprising how little it prepared the way for the reception of the new ideas. But to some of his readers, at any rate, it suggested that there was an alternative to the capitalistic system, and that Socialism or Communism was worthy of examination.[3]

The Socialism of Robert Owen had made a profound impression