An idea of the activity in turning out social reform laws can be gained by enumerating some of the recent legislation of this kind. In 1899 the system of old-age pensions was revised and extended, and the rate of pension payments was increased; then the law on accident insurance was amended and improved. In 1902 a law defining the rights of seamen was thoroughly overhauled and brought into harmony with the spirit of modern labor reform views in Germany. A revision of the sick-insurance law was made last year. Laws regulating the relations between tradesmen and their employees have been passed, making specific provisions regarding the hours of closing, number of hours for work, and daily intermission for meals. A resolution has been passed asking for a bill similarly to protect the employees of lawyers, notaries, and bailiffs. There have also been many laws passed regulating the hours of employment in all manner of industries.
The German Government is pleased to busy itself in passing many laws for the benefit of the working population, but it never fails to assume the position of having conferred favors rather than having granted rights that intrinsically belonged to the class which the legislation concerns. In such legislation the Government always assumes the position of the giver of benefits to inferior beings. All this is apparent from the attitude of the different ministers toward the lower Government officials and employees, who are domineered over in an astonishing way. The right of organization by minor Government employees is severely frowned upon, and the harshest means are used to prevent it. If the political footsteps of the Government employee stray into the path of Social Democracy, they are quick to encounter serious obstacles. Count von Bülow has enunciated the principle that no Government employee can be a Socialist and every under official adopts that view.
The Government looks with scant favor on any sort of labor organization and steadfastly refuses to enact a law to permit labor unions to affiliate with each other in joint associations. That has long been one of the points of Socialist demand, and it is a permission strongly desired by the working classes generally. Last year a great congress of union socialistic workmen was held at Frankfort-on-the-Main. That congress represented 600,000 members, and it declared the solidarity of those members with the Socialists in respect to the demand for permission to affiliate the labor unions. Various resolutions have been passed in the Reichstag in favor of this extension of liberty to the workmen, but these resolutions have availed nothing. A delegation from the Frankfort congress presented their views in a petition to Count von Bülow, who promised to “take it into benevolent consideration.”
There is a class of politicians in Germany, members of the two conservative parties and the National Labor party, who are called in the political jargon of the day the “Scharfmacher.” They are men who want sharp, repressive measures against labor agitators, strikers, and particularly against Socialists. They are the stalwarts, the men of firm hand and implicit belief in relentless governmental authority. The “Scharfmacher” defend the excessively vigorous discipline in the army, and they approve of the action of the courts in their frequent punishment of lese-majesty.
The Socialist movement is thus seen to be a live political force in Germany, Belgium, France, Italy, and Austria, while in England, although it holds no position in national politics, it has accomplished more in the direction of municipal activities than has been done elsewhere. The general tendency is toward moderation. The revolutionary Socialists are everywhere in the minority in their party, and the tendency is further to reduce their influence. In general, the whole Socialist movement is becoming more opportunist, there is a growing disposition to be more practical, to endeavor to obtain such concessions as they can, and not hold out too strongly for the adoption of an entire programme and a general overturning of the present social order. The theoretical and academic socialism is giving way in some measure to a socialism which takes note of practical politics.
Beyond all question, many of the things which the Socialists are striving for are economically sound, ethically just, and politically desirable. They are fighting class privilege and the traditions of caste; they are struggling for a fairer franchise and
