The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1925-10-09

and the former minority. / want to
testify here to the accuracy Of this
estimate.
lTHE differences within the former
4 majority are as serious as were
those between the two former fac
tions. Differences arose at the con-
vention and have been intensifying
since the convention. But these diff
ferences which came to the surface
in the convention crisis, and which
have intensified since then, were
themselves the outgrowth of old diff
ferences, and were foreshadowed by
the old differences. And all of these
differences have become synthesized
and concentrated now into one, big
predominant question.
That question is this: The role Of
the Communist International and the
relations Of our party and our party
leaders to the Communist lnterna-
tionaI.
In the controversy in the group
over this question, conflict has de-
veloped between Comrade Foster and
myself And in connection with the
remarks l make on this l want to re-
mind the comrades Of my long col
laboration with Comrade Foster.
Some Of the greatest forward-steps
of the party have been brot about as
the result of this collaboration, to-
gether with some other comrades. AS
far back as 1921 and 1922, this collab
Grafton made it possible simultane-
ously to develop the trade union work
on broad scale and to organize the
legal party. These achievements
laid the basis for the party to be-
come factor in the labor movement
Comrade Foster played a tremendous
role in all OF this; and l collaborated
with him and with other comrades
And If we now come to the point
where our differences are so sharp
that there appears to be no POSSIBLE
Lity to reconcile them--and we are at
such a point-it is not without great
pain to those who were part Of the
collaboration.
ION receipt of the Communist Inter
y national telegram, profound cri-
sis was Immediately precipitated in
the group Of the former majority at
THE party convention. The immedi-
ate difference appeared to arise over
two separate propositions put before
the caucus: one by Comrade Foster
and one by Comrade Dunno and
myself. Comrade Fosters original
| proposition, was that we should
accept only a minority of the
Central Executive Committee, and
that he should not participate; and
that the organization Of the new Gen.
trail Executive Committee in fact
should be carried out by the repre-
sentative Of the Communist Interna-
tional, and not by us who were the
majority at the convention. Our
counter-proposition was that we, the
majority, should organize the Central
Executive Committee. At first / pro-
/ posed an even division, half and half;
and later it was modified to include
the representative of the Communist
International, on his suggestion. The
difference was not technical but po-
litical. 1t was difference in attitude
towards the decision and towards the
situation created by it. considered
that Comrade Fosters proposition
had serious objective consequences.
| considered that if we, as a majority
of the convention, should refuse to or
ganize the new Central Executive
Committee, or that in any event Com.
rade Foster should not go into the
new Central Executive Committee, II
could not be interpreted in any other
way than that we were rejecting re.
sponsibility for the Central Executive
COMMITTEE. This would mean that
the party would be thrown into cri
sis in which the Central Executive
Committee would be deprived of the
assistance and support which it would
require from us to pull the party
thru the crisis.
Our proposition was based on the
opinion that the situation was such
in the party, precipitated by the
decision, that we were obliged if we
wish to save the party from democrat
ization, to take responsibility to the
| full limit of the possibilities under the
provisions of the decision.
lIETE held discussion in the caucus
NV for two days, and in this discus
sion pointed out, together with
other comrades, the objective conse
quences Of the attitude shown by
Comrade Foster.
We stated there that Comrade Eos.
ter's proposition would create con
dition making 1t impossible for the
party to work, or for the Central Elk
ecutive Committee to lead it or CON.
troll it; and that this would bring us
inevitably, not only into conflict with
the Central Executive Committee, but
into conflict with the Communist In.