The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1930-05-01
By r. W. ROBSON London).


twelve months of growing establishment on
the part of the masses.
This alone makes the coming May Day of
outstanding significance and Importance, for
on this day the most class conscious workers
voice their demands and refresh themselves
in the struggle to achieve Them
For the miners, May Day will bring with
added force the knowledge that the Labor
Government, shielded and allotted by the
Miners Federation of Great Britain, has
brought no improvement in working conditions,
no shortening of hours, nothing better than
starvation wages. Under Macdonald, the po-
lice protection of scabs is even more insolent
in its display of force and ruthlessness than
under Baldwin
The cotton textile operatives, celebrating
May Day, will clearly understand that a La
Dor Government appointed the Commission
which brought the wage-cuts. The woollen
workers of Yorkshire will remember that their
wages have also been reduced and that police
terrorism against militant workers has reached
unheard of proportions under the Labor Gov
eminent regime.
Similarly, throughout industry, the workers
will remember on May Day, when they dem
onstrate together their solidarity against capt.
tasm, that after nearly year OF Labor Gov
eminent, that government has been the great
est ally of capitalism in every sphere and the
bitterest enemy of the working class.
Already there are signs that May Day, 1880,
will bring big response from the workers,
registering the growth OF miltancy which IS
manifest everywhere. That this is no idle as
sertion can be seen from the attitude of the
London Trades Council and the London Labor
Party to the question of May Day. These two
bodies, representing the official machine in
London, have chafed at the continued support
given by thousands of workers to the militant
united front body, the London First of May
Celebration Committee, which has an honorable
record extending back over nearly forty years.
Of late years attempts have been made, par
ticularly by Herbert Morrison, of the London
Labor Party, to split the May Day demonstra-
tions by concentrating on the first Sunday in
May for the celebrations"
But the respectable, orthodox Sunday af-
fairs have never been very successful, and
thousands of workers have continued to give
their support to the First of May Committee.
Hence, in preparation for May Day, 1880,
WALL of the London Trades Council, and Nor
rison, of the London Labor Party, evidently
felt that it would be desirable to try some
new maneuver against the militant First of
May Celebration Committee.
For taking into account the fact that the
May Day demonstrators must inevitably dem
onstrate against the Labor Government in reg
istering their opposition to capitalism, Wall
and Morrison were in quandary. Their past
efforts to make May Day pleasant Sunday
afternoon affair had been complete failure,
merely leaving the leadership on May l in the
hands of the militant First of May Celebra-
tions Committee.
Hence, the renegade Communist, Wall (who
left the Party in anticipation of the COM
Portable secretaryship of the London Trades
Council falling to his LOTT, and the frothy
Fighter" of Communists, Herbert Morrison,
decided to organize an "official" May Day
demonstration in London on May l. The mo-
tive was obvious, it was to mislead workers
who desired to demonstrate on May Day into
believing ~ that there some working
class virtue remaining in the London Trades
Council, and (2) that the Labor Government
was not so anti-working class as its record
leads one to believe For such an Official
May Day would be eminently respectable,
would. be aimed at damping down militant
class feeling and trying to maintain the Labor
Government on its rapidly crumbling pedestal
in the eyes of the working class
A famboyant appeal was sent out to the
Trade Unions and other bodies for support and
for funds, signed by Ben Tillett among others,
and it seemed as if London to witness
two separate May Day demonstrations, that of
the mlllCanIS WIFI us long tfdulClOllS, anu us
working class policy, condemning the pro-
capitalist Labor Government, and the "offi-
cial' Labor demonstration which must only
support the Labor Government.
But as time passed two things became clear;
one was the growing militancy of the workers,
which went beyond any Official control, and
the other, the complete failure of the social
fascist L.TC. and Labor Party to rally suf-
ficient support for their separate May Day
celebration The first factor is all-important.
To bring on to the streets behind it's false
slogans those workers who are not yet fully
dsillusioned, would result in the Trades Coun-
Gil actually assisting the militants who have
formed united front with the Communist
Party to celebrate May l. Inevitably the class
character of the celebrations would attract
workers to the banners of the militants and
leave the Laborists with the official elements
only. And so Mr. Wall has thought better of
his separate May Day demonstration, and
under cover of a number OF lame excuses, drops
the whole thing.
This episode is of the highest significance.
1t not only exposes the role Of the so-caed
"Lefts" who endeavor to utilize the militant
class desires of the workers for support of
the Labor policy, but it above all shows that
when the class policy of struggle against this
treacherous line is boldly pressed by the hon.
est fighters under the leadership of the Com
munist Party, then the workers have the vic
tory.
For this withdrawal of Wall and Morrison is
heavy defeat for those elements within the
Labor machine who endeavor to maintain