NOTES AND ABSTRACTS.
Official Social Politics in Germany during the Last Winter. When I wrote some months since of the proposed "Jail Bill" (Zuchthausvorlag] in an article published in the January number of this JOURNAL, the fate of this law was still uncer- tain. More speedily than could be anticipated, a decision was reached on November 20 ; without consideration by a commission, the law was rejected upon the second reading by an overwhelming majority in the Reichstag. Up to the last moment it was unknown what position the Central party, which holds the balance of power, would take. As is known, the Central party had announced its own schemes for the right of coalition of workingmen and had shown its readiness to provide increased protection for those who offer labor. These proposals of its own were dropped at the last hour, and the party went over completely to the side of the radical antagonists of the bill. So it came about that only the Conservatives and a majority of the National Liberals voted for a consideration by a commission ; and this object was no longer attainable.
The fortunes of this "Jail Bill" unquestionably meant a victory of the working- men and of the liberal parties. Through the unanimous opposition of all sections of the working class all the parties outside of the Social Democrats were driven to reject the bill. The decided antagonism of the Central party is to be explained only by the fact that the Catholic workingmen, who have during the past years combined in the Christian Labor Unions, have exerted a powerful pressure upon their representa- tives. By the side of this effort of the working class, that of the professors has not been unavailing in relation to public opinion. It is claimed that this very opposition has not been without influence on the emperor. At the same time, this rejection of the "Jail Bill " has not had any further positive consequence. One might have expected that the general conviction which had been called forth by the contest on the " Jail Bill " would crystallize into a legal protection of the right of coalition. Unfortunately that has not yet come to pass.
For one thing, the blame for this lies with the attitude of the Social Democrats, who, through excess of confidence in victory, have repulsed all those who would naturally work with them. They went particularly wrong, after the affair of the " Jail Bill," by following the error of the government in its rejected bill ; for they proposed to place the capitalist manager in an exceptional legal position, by permitting the workingmen to post strike pickets, but not to permit the manager to send out the blacklists to boycott objectionable workingmen. By this excess the possibly practicable success which a moderate counter-proposition might have secured was naturally brought to defeat ; since it was evident in advance, even to those who offered it, that this proposal, with all the advantages it offered, would be rejected. 1
On the other hand, public attention was soon diverted from these questions of the right of coalition. Even before the decision in the affair of the "Jail Bill," in a speech at Hamburg the emperor had revealed his purpose to ask for an increase of the navy, although this had been strengthened considerably two years before. This new navy project, and, in connection with it, the problems of foreign policies (the Transvaal war), absorbed the public interest of the nation from November to April. It was not certain that the new scheme for the navy would be favorably received in the Reichstag. In case of its rejection a dissolution of the Reichstag and a new election were to be expected. On this account the entire political agitation of the last winter was concentrated on this question, and the further development of the right of coalition had to retire to the background.
1 1 presume that it is this proposal of the Social Democrats which is meant by the editorial note on p. 454, and that the informant who furnished data for the editor's note was of the erroneous belief that it was a bill brought forward by the government itself. I cannot explain the note otherwise. M.
279
