The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1927-12-31

This article should have appeared
in the New Leader as reply to Mr..
James OneaPs review of "The His
tory of the American Working
Glass;, 1t was sent to the New
Leader on December together
with letter asking them to pub
lish it not later than December Is.
But instead of publishing my reply
in the issue of December II there
is another slanderous attack by
James Oneal against my book. In
this article Oneal informs me that
the New Leader received my reply.
1t seems that this article was not
published because the New Leader
does not want its readers to know
the truth.
IN the November 26 issue of the New
Leader, organ of the Socialist Par.
ty, no less parsonage than the edit.
or himself, Mr.. James Oneal, ere
views" my recently published book
History of the American Working
Class" In a four-column arraign-
ment, among other things, Mr.. Oneal
says: Rarely has there been COM
pressed within the covers of single
volume as much ignorance, plagiar-
ism, misquotation, and even appro-
priation of the work of other writers
as in this volume. There is not an
that may be charged against
an author that Bimba does not COM
nit" And then: "the book is worth
less" In this TRADE Mr.. Oneal calls
me every name under the sun Ia
"fool", "ignoramus", "plagiarist",
"pilferer", Appropriation, chief"
etc.. He just pours upon my head
his entire socialist vocabulary.
Mr.. Oneal himself has written two
historical books-"The Workers in
American History" and one on the
American Communist movement. In
the former he appears as liberal
more or less confused, and
offering some serious political errors,
nevertheless making contribution
to the history of the American work
ing class. In the latter he plays the
role of a hysterian, vituperator and
slanderer of everything that even
smells Communistic or revolutionary.
And as an actor in this latter role,
he wrote the TRADE not so much
against my book as against me.
Before I say anything of the
"crimes" charged against me by Mr..
Oneal l want to make it plain just
what my book is and what it is not.
First of all, in no place do claim
to have written an exhaustive and
history of the American
working class. Second, I do not pre-
tend to be pioneer in this field.
Third, nowhere do | say that I my
self went directly into every original
source for information on all ques-
tons, especially those dealing with
the earlier part of the American his
tory. rather used quite extensively
the material of those who had studied
the subject before me and made very
valuable contributions. Among them
found Mr.. Oneal himself and with
out any malice toward him I quoted
him on many points, giving him as
well as other authors full credit.
Fourth, many important questions
are left out or were eliminated on
account of lack of space. Some points
are barely touched upon for the same
To write an exhaustive his
tory of the American working class,
to deal with and elaborate on every
point and phase of this enormous
subject, would take not one volume
IF $50 pages, but at least dozen
volumes. My aim was to give brief
concise outline of the subject, dealing
,nly with the outstanding phases and
factors, connecting them with each
,ther and drawing lessons from them
4 the title of the book is misleading
o Mr. Onealr-I apologize, and SYM
,athize with my innocent victim.