Around these two unusual men, the modern French Socialist movement is formed. There have been numberless factions. Frenchmen love to split an idea and fight over the fractions. The most important of these factions, identified by their various leaders and doctrines, are the following: Jaurés leads those Socialists who believe in evolutionary Socialism, to be hastened by their participation in the practical politics of the day; Guesde leads those who believe in political revolution as the only effective method of gaining their ends; M. Griffuelhes leads the revolutionary syndicalists, who believe in violence and class war. Above the Jaurés and Guesde factions are the Independent Socialists, who do not submit to party discipline, though sharing the Socialistic ideals. And there is the group of Socialist-Radicals, who believe in property and patriotism as well as in the Socialistic ideals. In the Chamber of Deputies, the Jaurés faction has once combined with the Radicals, thus forming the temporary Socialist-Radical "bloc," under the premiership of Clémenceau. Just now the Guesde and Jaurés factions have united, forming the United Socialist party - probably also a temporary coalition.

began to call themselves Socialist-Radicals -forming the famous "bloc" which controlled the Government. Jaurés was made Vice-President of the Chamber and became the most potential figure in public life. Millerand was lifted into the cabinet, in 1899, the first Socialist in the world to hold such a place.

France, in the hour of her greatest need, was bowing to the Socialists. They were to save the Republic. In part payment for their votes the Radicals adopted the Socialists' "minimum programme" and passed a number of labor laws.

It seemed but a step from the "bloc" to the Premiership, from the Premiership to the Presidency, from the Presidency to the "Socialized State."

Then something happened, something very human. The Republic had weathered the storm, stronger than ever, and the Radicals forgot their allies. It was the old deception, the old disappoint

Guesde and Jaurés and all the rest fought one another furiously until the Dreyfus affair divided all Frenchmen into two camps. And all Socialists became Dreyfusards. The Dreyfus affair was the opportunity of the Socialists. Here was the issue clear cut, between the old and the new - the old traditions, religious, social, military, political, against the humble man's idea of justice. It was the heroic period of modern French Socialism. Red and black flags were borne by exulting multitudes through the streets of Paris. The University populaire was organized by the scholars to instruct the people in the issues. Inflammatory meetings were held everywhere. Learning united with passion to usher in the New Time. The flame of anticipation spread over the Republic.

In the Chamber of Deputies the Socialists coalesced with the Radicals - who

ARRESTING A SOCIALIST AGITATOR

ONE OF THOUSANDS OF SUCH ARRESTS MADE ANNUALLY BY THE POLICE OFFICERS OF FRENCH CITIES AND TOWNS

guiding principle is the coöperation of all for the good of all. Toward this end we are making constant progress. We are gradually undermining the present system."

"By what method are you doing this?" "By every method. Just now by the parliamentary method. We help make laws, we create public sentiment. This is the method by evolution. It does not preclude revolution. But revolution would do no good until the conditions are ripe. Conditions are ripening. Every centime added to the price of food, every new evidence of the heartlessness of the moneymaker, helps scatter the discontent that forms the proletarian motive.

"Don't misunderstand me. We are not merely wanting control of the government. We aim to control the forces that make the government. When we have the people with us, what is government? A toy.

"Certainly I believe Socialism is practical. Its day is coming. Just when and how no one can say."

Then I sought out Guesde in his simple home. Every gesture and word revealed his vehement enthusiasm. He paced the floor restlessly as he answered my questions, sometimes seating himself on a hassock near my chair, and he spoke earnestly in a voice that could be heard across the street.

"What is Socialism? It is the emancipation of the proletariat from economic unrighteousness. How will it be accomplished? By appropriating all forms of productive wealth to society, and putting humanity in possession, instead of selfish individuals. This means revolution. It may be peaceful. Jaurès thinks so and is content to take a slice at a time. I am restless. I don't believe we can ever attain our ideal through parliaments and politics. We must be prepared to meet the violence of the capitalist. Jaurès believes in the slow method. I believe in the effective method."

"Do you believe the Socialist ideal is practical?"

"Certainly. I have seen a wonderful change in the masses since I first began Socialistic speaking."

Here you have, from the leaders, the vague ideal that forms the potency of Socialism. If it were definite, it would cease to be an ideal, would lose its magic. Whatever danger lurks in Socialism is not in its leaders, nor in its methods, but is in the psychic power which the mystery of an intangible notion exercises over the minds of discontented masses. To what extremes will this idealistic hypnosis lead?

This spirit of humanitarian unrest and individual discontent is the prompter of the united party, with its 76 deputies. It is also the spirit of the Independent Socialists who have 34 deputies in the Chamber, mostly professional men, lawyers, professors, journalists, to whom party discipline and Marxian orthodoxy are distasteful. They are the connecting link between the unified party and the Socialist-Radicals. These latter have 240 votes in the Chamber, and in any other country would be called Socialists. I asked one of their leaders the difference between them, and he said: "We SocialistRadicals believe in property and patriotism; the Socialists don't."

What has been the experience of this parliamentary Socialism under Jaurès? To the Socialist, disappointing; to the believer in orderly progress, reassuring.

Nineteen hundred and two is the date of the first French democratic Republic. Combes was its premier, Jaurès its master. There were no "best people" in the cabinet. It was a coalition of Socialists and ultra-Radicals - proletarian and petty bourgeois. It undertook three tremendous tasks: separating Church and State, regenerating the army, democratizing the bureaucracy that system of centralized administration which the Republic inherited from Napoleon.

First, they began with the Church. French Socialists and ecclesiastics have never tried to understand each other. At the time of the disestablishment about four fifths of the wealth of France was in the control of professed churchmen, and four fifths of the poor people never went to church. "Millions of our people never see the inside of a church," a Socialist from Southern France told me. This warfare ended, politically, as soon as the

Radicals and Socialists became the dictators. The Combes-Jaurès government closed 20,823 establishments, and secularized education.

Here is a typical example of Socialistic methods. Years of gradual, almost imperceptible disintegration; a concurrence of power and opportunity - sudden collapse. No social structure, however ancient and firmly established, that raises the issue of poor vs. rich, in any form, is secure against this lithodomus, this burrowing mollusk, that bores through the hardest rocks and crumbles them into dust heaps.

Simultaneously came the reorganizing of the army. The old families still furnished the officers of army and navy. They were Royalists, and the Republicans would not trust them. The Republic - that was merely a compromise between Monarchists and Republicans was tilted on a narrow ledge. The Dreyfus affair was intended to tip it into the abyss. The Royalists had failed to reckon with the Socialists, and the time has gone by forever when European political plotters can afford to forget the Socialists.

A system of medieval espionage was instituted by General André. The footsteps of the suspects were dogged until he had them-either going to mass, or drinking absinthe in some remote provincial town, contrary to regulations. This was sufficient. The one showed his adhesion to the church of the Royalists, the other his disregard for the discipline of the Republic. Before the scandal became so great as to demand his resignation, André had weeded out the undesirables.

The third project, to render the administrative machinery more supple to democratic demands, remains unaccomplished. A powerful political secret society "Freemasonry" (which is in no way to be confused with our fraternal society of that name) binds Socialists and Radicals into a compact body, with great influence in every commune. But it has not succeeded in modifying the machinery of centralized autocracy. It may not really wish to do so. The system is useful when the Radicals are in power.

France now has a petty bourgeois army and navy, a petty bourgeois school system, a petty bourgeois government, thanks to the Socialists.

Meanwhile the Socialists saw three of their number elevated to the Cabinet: Millerand in 1899, and Viviani and Briand in 1906. Each successive appointment added ment added to their disillusionment. Too much was expected. Socialism is a ferment; the Socialists looked for an explosion. And Socialists who attain power, like all others who attain power, become conservative in the presence of vast responsibilities.

For example, when Millerand became the first Socialist minister in history, he was heralded throughout the world as a phenomenon. He proposed some splendid labor legislation. But there was no necromancy about his laws! The world moved on as usual, in poverty and plenty.

The disappointed Socialists met in convention, expelled their distinguished comrade from the party, and declared that whenever a Socialist accepts cabinet honors he ceases to be a Socialist.

Viviani proved himself less original than Millerand. But the third member of this Socialistic ministerial trio displayed talents that make him the most hated and most lauded man in France to-day hated by the Socialists, who call him a traitor; admired by the propertied bourgeois, who call him a sagacious statesman.

Aristide Briand was a country lawyer and a Radical when he appeared on the public stage. He soon became a Socialist of the fire-eating variety. In 1899, at a Socialist convention, he defended the general strike as "lawful insurrection,” and when the soldiers are called out to put it down, "if the command to fire is given, if the officers are stubborn enough to try to force the soldiers against their will, the guns might be fired, but perhaps not in the direction the officers thought. This blood hound became, by the miracle of office, the sly fox of officialdom.

While he was minister of education, under Clémenceau, the post office employees decided to test the sincerity of the Radical-Socialist ministry. They de