IMPERIAL LAW STRIKES AT SOCIALIST SOCIETIES

BERLIN, 1878-10-22. — BERLIN, Tuesday.—The Imperial Government has acquired extensive powers against the organised Socialist movement. The law against the publicly dangerous endeavours of Social Democracy, bearing yesterday's date, has now been published, following its passage through the Reichstag on Saturday by 221 votes against 149. Associations pursuing the revolutionary objects specified in the measure may be prohibited; meetings may be dissolved and publications suppressed. Prince Bismarck has thus secured the exceptional legislation which the Reichstag refused him earlier this year. The immediate question is no longer whether the Government shall possess these weapons, but how widely the authorities of the several German States will employ them.

The statute directs its first blow against associations which seek, through “social-democratic, socialistic or communistic” endeavours, the overthrow of the existing political or social order. Its provisions also reach organisations in which such endeavours manifest themselves in a manner threatening public peace, particularly harmony between the classes. This language gives the authorities a field considerably broader than the prosecution of a particular act of violence. A society's purposes, its proceedings and the character of its agitation may bring it within the prohibition. The Socialist organisation consequently faces danger not merely at its public meetings, but throughout the machinery by which subscriptions, instruction and political communication are maintained.

There is, nevertheless, an important boundary to the prohibition. The law does not abolish the franchise of Socialist electors, nor does it simply exclude Socialist candidates from the Reichstag. A man may still seek election although the association which would ordinarily organise his supporters has been forbidden. The distinction will be of great practical consequence. Parliamentary representation may survive while the societies, newspapers and meetings connecting representatives with their constituents are struck down. The Government has attacked the organised means of political action rather than enacted a general disqualification of every person holding Socialist opinions. How effectively an electoral movement can proceed under such conditions remains to be discovered.

The present settlement follows two attempts upon the Emperor's life which profoundly disturbed the country. On May 11, Max Hödel fired at His Majesty in Berlin without wounding him. On June 2, Karl Nobiling attacked the Emperor with a firearm and inflicted serious wounds. Hödel had belonged to the Socialist movement but had been expelled; responsibility for Nobiling's deed has not been established against the Socialist party. These distinctions have not prevented the outrages from giving exceptional force to the Chancellor's demand for repression. The Government's case concerns the supposed effect of revolutionary agitation upon public order, rather than proof that the party leadership directed either attack.

The parliamentary history is equally material. After the first attempt, the Government brought forward an exceptional measure which the Reichstag rejected in May. Following the second outrage, the chamber was dissolved and an election held on July 30. The appeal to the country altered the parliamentary ground upon which the Chancellor had to work. Conservatives gained strength, while the Socialist representation fell from twelve seats to nine. The new Reichstag has now approved a measure supported by Conservatives and much of the National Liberal party. Its passage marks a substantial victory for the Chancellor, though the 149 votes cast against it show that opposition to exceptional legislation remains considerable.

The movement against which the law is directed took its present united form at Gotha in 1875, when the two principal German working-class parties combined. Its programme declares for “a free state and a socialist society,” and demands universal, equal and direct suffrage, with voting by secret ballot. Such declarations explain both the movement's appeal and the apprehension with which established interests regard it. Its leaders include August Bebel and Wilhelm Liebknecht, whose parliamentary activity has made Socialist arguments familiar beyond the membership of local societies. The Government now seeks to separate that parliamentary presence from the organised agitation which has helped sustain it.

The restrictions upon print may prove scarcely less important than those upon associations. Newspapers and other publications advancing the prohibited endeavours are exposed to suppression, and the distribution of forbidden matter is subject to penalties. Meetings likewise fall within the authorities' reach. The legislation therefore bears upon the ordinary instruments through which a dispersed body of working men acquires a common political purpose. A prohibition served upon a central society would be of limited effect if its newspaper, collecting arrangements and public assemblies continued unaltered. The statute addresses these connected activities, giving the police means to interrupt the movement at several points rather than merely remove its name from a register.

More exceptional powers are available for places judged especially endangered. With the assent of the Federal Council, the competent State authorities may impose additional restrictions in specified districts, including tighter controls over meetings and the circulation of printed matter. Persons considered dangerous to public security or order may be denied residence there. Such provisions bring the consequences of political repression close to the household and the workshop: removal from a town may also mean separation from employment and family. These powers are not an announcement that every German city has already been placed under the exceptional regime. Their importance lies in the authority now provided for further local action.

For employers and commercial men, the measure promises a firmer official hand against agitation, but it supplies no immediate answer to disputes over wages, hours or the insecurity of employment. Nor can its publication alone furnish a reliable account of its effect upon trade. The political division is clearer than any commercial reckoning: the majority has accepted extraordinary restraints in the name of public security, while opponents have resisted the enlargement of police authority over political life. The legal distinction between prohibited agitation and permissible working-class association will require close attention. Much will depend upon whether officials apply the statute narrowly to its stated objects or broadly against organisations whose purposes are disputed.

The law is to remain in force until March 31, 1881, unless the legislature acts again. That limit leaves Parliament a future occasion to judge the Government's exercise of these powers, but offers little immediate shelter to an association ordered to close. The first prohibitions and any appeals against them will now command attention throughout the Empire. The Chancellor has won his legislative contest; the administrative contest begins. Socialist representatives retain a parliamentary platform, yet their supporters face the loss of the institutions through which common action is arranged. Whether this separation will weaken the movement or merely change its methods cannot be settled by today's enactment.