workers on the capitalist control of industry, even while the capitalist system as a whole remains in being. Mention has been made before of the development of the Building Guild organiza- tion. Side by side with this practical object-lesson, guildsmen have worked out policies for adoption in those industries in which it is not possible at present to establish guild organizations in rivalry with the existing capitalist system. They have sup- ported, in the case of the railways, the mines and certain other industries, demands for nationalization, always, however, coupling their support with the demand that nationalization must be accompanied by a large measure of democratic control over administration. At the same time they have pressed, in industry generally, the policy known as " encroaching control." " Encroaching control " means the attempt by the trade unions, while not at once overthrowing capitalism or dispossessing the present owners of the means of production, to transfer into the hands of the organized workers as many as possible of the func- tions of control which are at present exercised by employers or their representatives. The two outstanding forms of this propa- ganda of " encroaching control " are to be found: (a) in the de- mand put forward by the guildsmen for the election of foremen and supervisors by the rank-and-file workers; and (6) in the policy known as " collective contract."
(a) Guildsmen are never weary of urging that in place of the present system, under which the foremen and industrial supervisors are appointed by the employers, usually from the ranks of the manual workers, the workers, through their trade unions, should take into their hands the right to appoint their own foremen and supervisors. This demand has not at present been conceded save in an insignificant number of instances ; but the trade unions have taken certain steps towards it by securing, in numerous instances, the dismissal of foremen to whom their members have taken objection. The carrying-through of this policy of democratic election of foremen is closely bound up with the policy of " collective contract."
(6) By " collective contract " is meant a scheme capable of assuming a number of different forms, under which the whole of the workers in a particular shop, factory or department would make with their employer a single agreement as to their terms of service, the amount and character of their output, and the payment for it. Instead of the present system, under which the employer engages and pays each worker individually, and appoints his own representatives to exercise discipline in the workshop, the trade unions themselves, under this system, would make a contract with the employer to supply the neces- sary labour, including workshop supervision, and to carry out the work required, and would thus control engagements and dis- missals as well as workshop discipline. The employer, instead of paying each worker individually, would pay to the union, or to the works committee on its behalf, a lump sum, which the workers would then distribute amongst themselves in such a way as they might agree upon. By this arrangement, it is con- tended, the employer would be directly excluded from a certain sphere in which he now exercises control. The workers would thus not only get a valuable lesson and experience in the work of controlling industry, but would also greatly strengthen their position for a subsequent further assumption of power, which 'would involve the winning of industrial control over a wider area, including commercial as well as purely productive opera- tions. This system, too, has not yet been adopted anywhere in full; but certain approximations to it have been made.
The guildsmen stress, in the whole of their propaganda, the need for an appeal to a new motive in industry if men are to be persuaded to put out their best efforts, and to do their best work in the service of the community. They claim that in the past, since the coming of large-scale industry, production has been secured mainly by the operation of two motives fear (of unemployment and starvation) and greed (for higher re- muneration secured, e.g. by " payment by results "). They contend that these two motives are showing themselves more and more inadequate to secure the continuance of production, and that this is shown both by the increasing frequency and severity
of industrial disputes, and by the diminished willingness on the part of the workers to do their best. They maintain that a different spirit can be made to prevail in industry only if two conditions are satisfied. The first of these conditions is that the worker must have a sense that, in putting his best into his work, he is serving, not the private interest of any individual, but the whole community, and that his work is being directed to that end which will most conduce to the common benefit; the second condition is that the responsibility for doing his best must be placed upon the worker himself, and that he must be given freedom, in the form of self-government, in the organiza- tion of his work. These two ideas are often put together in the phrase " free communal service," which is regarded by guilds- men as the condition of the creation of reasonable industrial order. It is recognized that such an order would make higher demands upon the will and good-will of the mass of the people than the capitalist system; but guildsmen contend that, if the right appeal is made and the above conditions satisfied, the workers will rise to the occasion and will be prepared to do their best in the service of the public, because they will feel that they " count," and that the responsibility for the good con- duct of industry rests directly upon them. Guild Socialists always insist that the power which goes with responsibility must be diffused to the widest possible extent among the whole mass of the people, and that this is the necessary condition of democratic efficiency and healthy social organization.
REFERENCES. There is a large and growing literature dealing with Guild Socialism. See National Guilds, by S. G. Hobson; Guild Socialism Re-stated, by G. D. H. Cole; The Meaning of National Guilds, by M. B. Reckitt and C. E. Bechhofer; Old Worlds for New, by A. j. Penty; Self-Government in Industry, by G. D. H. Cole; other works by Hobson, Cole and Penty; and the various publications of the National Guilds League (39 Cursitor St., London, E. C. 4.). For hostile criticism see Guild Socialism, by G. C. Field; Our Social Heritage, by Graham Wallas; and The Case for Capitalism, by Hartley Withers. For the social theory of Guild Socialism see Social Theory, by G. D. H. Cole; Authority, Liberty and Function, by Ramiro de Maeztu; The Sickness of an Acquisitive Society, by R. H. Tawney; and Roads to Freedom, by Bertrand Russell. For its industrial policy see Chaos and Order in Industry, by G. D. H. Cole; The Nationalization of the Mines, by Frank Hodges, and the evidence volumes of the Coal Industry Commission, 1919 (evidence of Cole, Straker, Slesser, and others). The National Guilds League publishes a monthly journal, The Guildsman, in which questions of Guild Socialist and trade-union policy are regularly dealt with, and news given of the movement in various countries. (G. D. H. C.)
GUILLAUMAT, MARIE LOUIS ADOLPHE (1863- ), French
general, was born at Bancqneuf (Charente Inferieure) on Jan. 4 1863. He entered the Ecole de St. Cyr on Oct. 31 1882 and was appointed a sub-lieutenant of infantry on Oct. 1 1884. Four years later he was promoted lieutenant. In Nov. 1893 he became a captain and was transferred to the 147th infantry regiment. In 1903 he was appointed professor of military history at St. Cyr, and later became lecturer on infantry tactics at the Ecole de Guerre. He was promoted lieutenant-colonel in 1907 and colonel in 1910. In Jan. 1913 he became director of infantry at the Ministry of War, and on Oct. 8 of the same year was made a general of brigade, continuing to hold his appointment. On June 14 1914 he became chef de cabinet when M. Messimy was War Minister, but on the outbreak of the World War he was placed at the disposal of General Joffre. On Sept. 2 1914 he was given command of the 33rd Division, becoming, in the following Dec., a temporary general of division. On Feb. 25 1915 he took part in the defence of Verdun, in the operations attending the German offensive of Feb. 1916, and in the French (Somme) offensive of the same year. He was confirmed in his rank as a general of division on Dec. 23 1915. In Dec. 1916 he took over command of the II. Army from General Nivelle when that officer was appointed commander-in-chief. Twelve months later (Dec. 14 1917) he succeeded General Sarrail as commander-in-chief in Salonika. In this capacity he had the difficult task of restoring the moral of a heterogeneous force that had become disorganized through inaction, and of reconciling the divergent military interests of the Allies in this theatre. He drew up the offensive plan which Franchet d'Esperey afterwards carried out so brilliantly, but in June 1918 was suddenly brought back to
