Workmen's advocate. (New Haven, Conn.) 1883-1891, 1889-10-26
AT THE AMERICAN SECTION.

At 3 p. M, while Shevitch, Kappa.
port and Mrs. Greie were addressing q
vast and enthusiastic assembly of work.
ingmen at Vorwaerts Turn Hall, Dele.
gate Sanial entered the small room
where the American Section of Chicago
has long been accustomed to hold its
Sunday agitation meetings. 7. j. Nor
gan was then delivering ali eloquent
lecture on socialism to less than fifty
persons, ohe-half of whom were mem
bers of the Section. In the debate that
followed considerable ability was dis.
played by the speakers; ard to anyone
sufficiently experienced in organization
the thought would naturally have oc-
Cured that there must be some singular
defect in the policy, tactics, or manage
ment of the party when. in a city like
Chicago and with the excellent material
at its command, the American Section
could only muster little band of select
people, professional men for the most
part. Surely, such speeches as Dele
gate Sanial heard then and there, if
delivered in the right place and to the
right people, would soon put new face
on the social movement in the Western
Babylon, where capitalistic oppression
is heavier, and the lines between classes
are more sharply defined, than in any
other city on this continent. Why was
the light of truth thus confined within
the walls of dingy room in the busi-
ness quarter of Chicago? Why were
apostles Of socialism preaching to each
other where no one else could hear
them, instead of boldly addressing the
grimy mechanic and the ragged laborer
on some public square, if need be,
within easy reach of their novels? Or
were they, perchance, no apostles at all,
but cautious persons who feared that
by preaching pure social m where An
archy-precisely because Of their mac
tion-was making converts, they also
might be branded as anarchists, and
lose the respect of the "better class p
These and other questions of like pur-
port Delegate Sanial asked himself, won
deringly, while the debate lasted. The
riddle was solved for him before he left
the room.
After a short interview with Comrade
T. j. Morgan and Mrs. Sherlie Wood
man, in the course of which it was
made quite plain by these two leaders of
the American Section that they would
bitterly oppose conciliation, Delegate
Sanial was introduced to the Section in
business meeting and invited to state
the object of his visit, which he did in a
few words. Comrade Morgan asked
how many Sections were represented in
the convention, who they were, and the
names of their respective delegates or
proxies. All this information was freely
and accurately given. Comrade Mo-
gan then spoke at some length, con-
tending that the persons named as Iep-
resenting the German Section of Chi
cago and several others who acted as
proxies for other Sections were not en-
titled to do so. The same reasons which
he gave for disputing their quaIifca-
tions applied, he said, TO Delegate Sanial
himself, who claimed to represent the
American Section of New York. He
then dwelt upon the conflict that had
led to the present state of affairs.
blamed the New York Section for its
''high-handed proceedings" the Board
of Supervision for its tergiversations,
and TO a certain extent the Rosenberg
party for the improved charges they