DOCUMENTARY ESSAY The 'People's Charter' and the Enigmatic Mr.

Maltman Barry

Maltman Barry i s a remarkablefigurewho has excited controversy ever since his entry to the General Council of the First Intemational in October 1871.' His claims on our attention are considerable: he formed a lifelong attachment to Marx and Engels; he was one of the few British delegates to the Hague Congress ofthe Intemational in 1872, the Universal Socialist Congress at Ghent in 1877 and the Paris Socialist Congress in 1878.^ In the newspaper edited by Barry, The People's Advocate, and in particular in 'The People's Charter', he advocated a distinctly 'modem', if notMarxist, Socialist programme. In the annals ofthe British Labour movement, however, Barry has attracted only criticism and opprobrium. Fortwo decades former members ofthe General Council ofthe Intemational, Mottershead, Eccarius, Jung and the General Secretary, Hales, joined with their avowed enemies, the Republican leader Bradlaugh and his hagiographer, A. H. Smith, in vilifying Barry.^ He was denounced, variously, as a police spy, an agent of Gladstone and, subsequently, ofthe Tory Party.'' Barry's most vituperative assailant, Bradlaugh, attacked him in the following terms: '... he never had any experiencewhateverofEnglishorforeign trade societies, norhadheanyvery marked political convictions. In 1866 and 1867 he was an avowed Tory. There was nothing in his career to connect him in any fashion with a working man's association, either politically or socially . . . his whole soul measurable in a whisky glass - utterly worthless.'^ We are faced, therefore, by a double paradox. Marx and Engels evidently preferred Barry to his critics among the experienced Intemationalists. Furthermore, criticism of Barry united in a curious and indeed unprecedented alliance, both the advocates and detractors ofthe First Intemational. Some modem historians have attempted to resolve the paradox in one of two ways. Either it is argued that Barry's political opinions are ipso facto incomprehensible. In this view, Barry becomes 'mysterious' and 'enigmatic'.' Altematively, a more sinister interpretation is suggested. Barry, it is alleged, no sooner attached himself to Marx, than he began to intrigue - for whatever reason - against the most prominent English Intemationalist, John Hales. Indeed, Barry's 'intrigues' have been held up as a significant reason for the quarrel between Marx and Hales and the subsequent division and decline of the First Intemational in Britain.' Were these allegations to be true they would of course place Barry's political activities in general, and 'The People's Charter' in particular, in a distinctly equivocal light. They are not, however. The 'enigma' of Maltman Barry can be unravelled only by reference to the twenty years between 1872 and 1892 during which Barry was active in the British Labour movement First and foremost, Barry was ajoumalist, of some talent, who throughout his life wrote for the conservative Standard.^ He was relatively well connected in joumalistic circles and his contributions appeared in a number of periodicals including TheSpectator, Nineteenth Century, Whitehall Review, Pall Mall Gazette, Weekly Dispatch and Examiner.'^ Significantly, none of these publications appealed directly to a working class, still less a Socialist audience. It was only through the People's Advocate dinA much later, in association with H. H. Champion, through the Labour Electorthat Barry tried his hand at popular joumalism.'" The only other profession exercised by Barry seems to have been that of a clerk.' He came to the Intemational, therefore, as an outsider, and rapidly demonstrated that he did not share some ofthe views - and prejudices - of other English members ofthe General Council. In October 1871 a British Federal Council and a British Federation ofthe Intemational were established forthe first time. Prior to this, the General Council had attempted to woo the Trades Unions and to work directly upon the British Labour movement '^ In 1870, in reply to criticism of this policy, the Council pointed out that Britain was the most advanced capitalist nation and yet the English lacked 'revolutionary fervour'. It was vital that the Council should have its hand 'directly on this great lever of proletarian revolution'.'^ After the defeat of the Paris Commune, a series of considerations prompted the establishment of a British Federal Council. Most important was the self-evident failure ofthe previous policy. The B ritish working class and the Trades Unions did not respond to the Commune with any great sympathy.''' It was recognized, moreover, that the influence exercised by the General Council in Britain was very weak. '^ AFederal Council would, it was anticipated, have greater success and might establish branches based upon Democratic and Republican clubs and societies rather than on the Trades Unions. '* On the negative side, Marx had begun to manifest a certain irritation with the English Labour leaders, two of whom, Odger and Lucraft resigned from the General Council because of its position on the Commune. '^ Other English Intemationalists were much more concemed with the idea ofa British Federation than with the affairs ofthe Intemational as a whole. Despite its venue, the London Conference in September 1871 marked a low point of British participation; English members ofthe General Council evidently disinterested themselves in what
34

they saw as 'Continental quarrels'. '* As soon as the British Federal Council was set up, it began to draw apart from the General Council. The divergence arose for three reasons. Hales and the majority ofthe members ofthe new Council were determined to establish their autonomy and independence." Secondly, they resented the growing predominance in the General Council of'Continentals', and particularly, of some ofthe Communard refugees.^" The issue which led to the beginning ofthe quarrel between the two Councils, however, was the preoccupation ofthe English with purely English affairs. The British Federal Council was invited to take part in a republican demonstration in favour of Sir Charles Dilke. This was an invitation in aid of a dubious cause. Dilke was extremely popular; indeed he was the most celebrated republican orator in Britain at this time. Nonetheless, his aristocratic republicanism scarcely went beyond a criticism ofthe financial perquisites ofthe Crown and suggestions of limited constitutional reform. All the members of the British Federal Council, with the single exception ofMaltman Barry, desired to support the demonstration, presumably out of a wish to share Dilke's popularity, if not his platform.^i Barry raised this issue in his correspondence with Engels and at the next meeting ofthe General Council.^^ The immediate result, however, was notthat Hales was forced to resign his secretaryship ofthe General Council, but that Barry's mandate from the Federal Council was withdrawn." Relations between the two Councils and between Marx and Hales continued to deteriorate after this episode, but not, it would seem, through Barry's 'intrigues'. One ofthe French members of the General Council noted that 'for a long time I have guessed Hales' intentions; he hoped certainly to make the Federal Council a tool in his hands'.^'' Communard members ofthe Council referred to the English members as 'co^M/rti'or criticized the'not so active[English] members'." Marx'suspicions of the Federal Council were further aroused by the accusations levelled against Hales by Mottershead. According to the latter. Hales had offered his services to the Liberal party. Mottershead, moreoever, asserted his own inalienable right to employment by either Conservatives or Liberals. He even boasted ofthe fact that he had never been employed by the Tory party, but had always - if there was a choice - approached the most 'advanced' Liberal candidate. The General Council resolved to hush the matter up, but only until the next General Congress.^* For their part, English Internationalists remarked the lack of confidence between the English and French, while Hales, provoked by discussions around the strengthening of the powers of the General Council, twice protested that the Intemationai was being transformed into a 'secret society." By the time, therefore, that the British Federation held its first Congress in Nottingham in July 1872, mutual suspicion, if not hostility was already well developed. The Congress signified the rupture between the two Councils and Hales amidst considerable ill feeling was forced to resign as General Secretary ofthe International.^* The final act in the quarrel occurred at the Hague Congress. Barry was present with the mandate of a Chicago Branch ofthe Intemationai (presumably given to him by Marx). His credentials were challenged by Mottershead who asserted flatly that Barry was no t a' recognized leader of English working men'.^' It was at this point that Marx, disillusioned by the Nottingham Congress and alerted that Hales had travelled to the Hague with the express purpose of conferring with other dissident Intemationalists, delivered his notorious riposte in defence of Barry.^" In language which he had before employed only privately, he stated that if Barry 'was not a recognized leader of English working men, that was an honour, for almost every recognized leader of English working men was sold to Gladstone, Morley, Dilke and others'." This was the breaking point. While Barry voted with the party of Marx on the important issues of the Congress, Hales and Mottershead fratemized with Marx' opponent, Guillaume.^^ Thereafter the majority of the British Federal Council repudiated the Hague Congress and inspired a breakaway movement in the British Federation." Thus was bom the curious alliance of Intemationalists and their detractors. Mottershead, Jung, Eccarius and Hales all adhered to the dissident 'federalist' British Council. Unwilling to criticize Marx, they attacked Barry all the more fiercely. In this, they were joined by the outright critics ofthe Intemationai, Bradlaugh and Smith.^" Itwas, then, at the Hague that the legend of Barry, 'the spy Karl Marx employed for all manner of dirty work', was bom.^' After the wreck ofthe Intemationai, Barry's political activity took three forms. He continued, firstly, to defend the Hague Congress decisions.^^ Even after the dissolution ofthe British Federation, Barry asserted, somewhat disingenuously, thatthe Intemationai remained active in Britain, 'although in many disguises'." In 1875 a largely fictitious 'Soho Branch' ofthe Intemationai, animated it seems by Barry, celebrated the anniversary ofthe Paris Commune.^* A couple of years later, Barry was still maintaining the tenuous pretence that the Intemationai was alive by addressing correspondence in the name of that body to the Radical press.^' Barry was active, secondly, in the few groups which survived the collapse ofthe Intemationai and the general decline ofthe republican agitation in 1873 and 1874. Along with a handful of other Socialists, some of whom had belonged to the British Federation ofthe Intemationai, Barry helped to inspire the Working Men's Parliamentary Association which briefly described itself as a 'Branch ofthe Intemationai'.'"' He participated in meetings ofthe subsequent incamations of that body, 35

the Manhood Suffrage League and the Social Democratic Club, the English speaking section of the Communistische Arbeiter Bildings Verein.'" It was as a delegate of the latter body that Barry attended the Intemational Socialist Congress of 1877 and 1878. Information is rather more readily available conceming the third aspect of Barry's activities: his collaboration with Marx and Engels and his attempt to popularize their views. Between 1872 and 1878, Barry eagerly sought the opinions and suggestions ofthe two exiles. He played an important role in the loyal 'centralist' faction ofthe British Federation; he asked for Marx' assistance in writing articles for the Examiner and the [ Weekly] Dispatch and he arranged for Wilhelm Liebknecht's correspondence to appear in the Wtitehatl[Reviewy^ In the joumals with which he had contact, Barry inserted material from Marx and Engels on the policies pursued by Bismarck and on the German Socialist Party.'''' In 1877, he became the means by which Marx could wage a covert campaign against Russian assertiveness in the Balkans and Gladstone's response, or rather lack of response, to this.''^ In short, Barry became Marx' 'factotum'.''^ Indeed, it is arguable that during this period he was Marx' closest British ally. Marx glowingly referred to him as the 'great Barry', 'der irrepressible Barry', and 'our most trusted and most able British Party member'.'" This work ofcollaboration was not directed, forthe most part, toward a working-class public. The exception, the most accessible and the mostexplicitly Socialistaspect of Barry's propaganda, occurred with Barry's assumption ofthe editorship ofthe People's Advocate. The newspaper first appeared in 1875 under the title: TTie People's Advocate and National Vindicator ofRight Versus Wrong.^^ The original editor was John de Morgan, a colleague of Barry's in the Working Men's Parliamentary Association.'" As the grandiose title might suggest, de Morgan formulated a vague and eclectic programme of 'equal rights, equal laws and justice for all'. Prospective readers and, more important still, prospective investors were to be regaled with Radical politics, 'household hints', 'short and continuous tales', law reform, 'golden' ideas and literary correspondence. The whole extraordinary pot-pourri would retail for just one penny. 50 The spectrum of causes which found a welcome in the columns ofthe People's Advocate was equally broad. The newspaper successively extolled the virtues of Republicanism, the Tichborne Claimant, the Labour Protection League, Free Speech, a Servants' Benevolent Society and Charity towards prostitutes. To support the scheme a limited company was set up with a share capital of 2000. Barely a quarter ofthe 1 shares were subscribed, however, and the newspaper rapidly ran into financial difficulties.^' After the eleventh issue the National Press Agency, which printed the People's Advocate, refused to extend any further credit and de Morgan was forced to remove to J. C. Durant's in Hatton Garden. Publication ceased entirely on the 2 October 1876 amidst growing suspicion - later confirmed - that de Morgan had run off with the cash box.52 The resourceful editor attempted to steal a march on his creditors by reappearing as TTieSaturdayNewsletterinwhich the political baggage was abandoned in favour of 'daring crimes' and 'novelties'. This was no more financially successful than the mixture as before and the Newsletterran to only one issue. Anew series ofthe People's Advocatecommenced on the 15 April 1876. De Morgan's replacement, Barry,broughtto the newspapera Socialist editorial policyofwhich'The People's Charter' (attached as an appendix) was the most succinct expression. No evidence has come to light which would indicate Marx' and Engels' direct participation in Barry's project We may infer, nevertheless, that fora number ofreasons they would not have looked unkindly upon Barry's exertions. Throughout the newspaper's brief existence, Barry consistently condemned the constitutional arrangements in Britain 'framed for the subjugation ofthe masses', and the laws under which 'the mass ofthe people is shut out from all power'." To remedy this situation Barry proposed the People's Charter, a 'clear and definite programme around which the whole ofthe working class can rally'. The key elements ofthe Charter were the abolition ofthe Monarchy and the House of Lords, the nationalization of all religious and educational endowments and the 'reform and simplificaton of the law'. The 'greatest and most important of all social and political questions', however, was the 'nationalization of the land and instruments of production'.^'' With a veiled reference to its German progenitor, Barry proposed to expound a Marxist critique of capitalism to his readers." The People's Advocate disappeared before he had the opportunity to do so, but in the Spectator Barry had delivered a lively criticism ofthe contemporary wisdom ofthe British Association, making his own position clear. Barry dismissed the vain attempts to convince 'working men that everything is forthe best in the best of all possible worlds'. He had no partial reforms to offer. Instead, he wrote, 'for the individual capitalist I would substitute the State, and the State power I would transfer from its present holders, the middle and upper classes, into the hands ofthe working class.. .'^* In the five issues ofthe People's Advocate which he edited, Barry spelled out the implications ofhis political programme. On 22 April, his editorial was devoted to the Social Democratic Party in Germany. Under the slightly spurious title of'The Intemational in Germany', he again made a veiled reference to his collaboration with Marx and Engels. He could write, he stated, 'with a knowledge ofthe subject not possessed by any other English 36

journal'. The lesson to be learnt from Liebknecht's party was 'the value of organisation and of a working-class press'. England it was true, was dotted over with trade societies, but the absence of a 'connecting and directing head', rendered them politically dumb. If only the 'English Democracy' would unite and organize, 'a success as great as that which awaits the German Social Democrats is quite within its grasp'." Barry's was one of the few British voices to be raised, at this time, in defence ofthe Paris Commune, and in support ofan amnesty for the Communards.5' Moreover, if the People's Advocate continued to carry the echo, under Barry, ofthe agitation against the emoluments ofthe Prince of Wales, it was much more critical ofthe deficiencies ofthe Tichborneinspired Magna Charta Association and the tergiversations of the Labour Representation League.^' Barry preferred to carry reports of the more forthright Manhood Suffrage League.^o In the last issue, finally, Barry vigorously denounced the iniquities ofthe system of indentured Chinese Labour.*' The People's Advocate under Barry was no more successful than the 'national vindicator of right versus wrong'. In the fifth issue, Barry promised that the newspaper would be expanded from its eight pages, but the sixth issue was never printed. One can only speculate as to the reasons for this failure. Possibly the Directors ofthe company created by de Morgan did notagree with the new editorial policy.*^ Acrisis might have been brought about by anew refusal by the printer to work for credit The advanced programme of the newspaper, the small amount of advertising and the financial difficulties of its predecessor would tend to suggest that ultimately the People's y4rfvoca/e collapsed because its audience in London was too limited to support it After the disappearance ofthe newspaper, Barry became involved in the long and tumultuous campaign against Gladstone's foreign policy over the Eastem Question. The campaign marked the culmination of Barry's collaboration with Marx and yet, by a strange irony, it also marked the beginnings of his transition to the 'socialist wing of the Tory party'. In certain ways, the advocacy of the Turkish cause resembled Barry's activity in the Intemationai. On both occasions he trod a lonely path at Marx' side; on both occasions, the position he adopted opposed him to English Labour leaders. The difference, however, was that whereas the Intemationai Working Men's Association had few friends in the Conservative party, Barry's critique, between 1876 and 1880, of Gladstone's policies converged with the campaign waged by the Conservatives.*^ As well as the articles and correspondence through which Barry expounded Marx' views, he organized a series of demonstrations and meetings under the auspices ofthe National Society for the Resistance of Russian Aggression and the Protection of British Interests in the East.*"" The chief burden of Barry's propaganda was that the Bulgarian atrocities were being cynically exploited by Russian agents. If Russian expansion was not checked, the centre ofgravity in Europe would shift away from the liberal powers (Britain and France), to the reactionary ones (Russia and Prussia).'^ Such considerations led Barry to the conclusion that the Turks 'are entrusted with - and heroically discharge - the great and sacred duty of offering resistance, in the interests of European liberty, to the sanguinary aggressions ofthe most despotic and cruel power that ever blasted with its presence the fair face of God's beautiful universe'.'* On the basis of rather slender evidence, it would appear that it was thejoint attack on Gladstone and the Liberals which placed Barry in contact with elements within the Conservative party. It is impossible to give precise details, but the decisive contacts seem to have been made between 1878 and 1880. At the former date, Barry, who was later rumoured to have practically unlimited access to 'Tory gold', could not afford even to pay the brass bands who played at a pro-Turkish demonstration.*' By 1880, however, Barry was recording that it was the Conservatives who joined in the movement of the 'most advanced section of the Radical Party', and who led the campaign to a 'triumphant tennination'.*^ This evidence is not conclusive, but certainly links existed with Tory 'radicals' by the following year. In 1881, Barry supplied Randolph Churchill with information designed to embarrass Gladstone's Cabinet over the prosecution ofthe German Anarchist, Johann Most.*' Barry's activity in Socialist circles continued, but it took on an increasingly equivocal character. In 1884 he advocated the formation ofan 'independent party of Labour'. At the same time, however, he abandoned his earlier strictures against the hereditary principle, to urge 'Aristocrats and Democrats' alike to support the House of Lords in its resistance to Gladstone's somewhat limited proposals to widen the franchise." Ayear later, Barry was implicated in the moves to finance two working-class Parliamentary candidates from Conservative sources. H. H. Champion was the ostensible donor, but at least one witness was to claim that he heard the 'chink of gold' being given to Champion by Barry." How is one to reconcile Barry's support for Lord Salisbury's 'appeal to the people', or his reputed profligacy with 'Tory gold', with his earlier Socialism? It may well be that the sinister interpretation preferred by Barry's critics is correct." In my view, however, a more generous explanation has greater plausibility. Barry's writings and actions suggest that his eventual conversion to 'Tory Democracy', was the counterpart to, and the result of, his deepening pessimism about the realization of Socialism. In the Intemationai, Barry had associated himselfwith the idea of independent working-class political activity.'" Even before the disintegration ofthe Intemationai and the demise ofthe hopes it had aroused, he seems to have
37

entertained some doubts as to the degree ofpolitical education and experience ofthe working classes.'^ The barren years which followed can only have confirmed his fears. The projected British party of Labour and the activities of the Working Men's Parliamentary Association came to naught. One after another, the Republican clubs and radical societies, which had been established in the heady years of 1872 and 1873, dissolved. Failure was everywhere; successes were insignificant. When in 1874, afterthe most strenuous efforts, two miners were elected to Parliament, they were scarcely distinguishable, to Barry's eyes at least, from the other Liberal Members. Thus, by the time that Barry became editor ofthe People's Advocate, the Intemationai had disappeared. Socialist theory was restricted to a handful of adherents and no working-class political party was in sight. Despite its superficial optimism, an undercurrent of despair, perhaps even a premonition of failure can be detected in the 'People's Charter'. On a first reading, one's attention is seized by the brightness ofthe prospect: 'with the spread ofeducation and intelligence... working men are beginning to realize that,... they can think out their own political ideals...' Upon reflection, however, one retums to the preceding statements which stress the magnitude and difficulty ofthe task, the power of middle-class ideas, and the scars ofthe 'mental pupillage' to which the working class has been subjected. This analysis may seem exaggerated, but Barry must surely have realized that his manifesto was being launched into a void. In any event, the disappearance ofthe People's Advocates\^\?\td another disappointment, a new failure to bring the party of Labour into being. It seems likely that Barry's journalistic contact with Conservative circles and his tacit co-operation with the Tory party over the Balkan issue suggested to him the possibility of at last reversing the series of failures. Money - from whatever source - would be necessary to finance any decisive political success; the Conservative party was free at least of the link between Labour and Liberalism which had so compromised earlier working-class political initiatives. In the light of his previous experiences, Barry may well have been sceptical, moreover, ofthe possibility of establishing a working-class political party in any other way. History was to prove him wrong. Not only was the Independent Labour Party quite capable of survival without patronage, but Barry's growing attachment to 'Tory Democracy', isolated and discredited him.'* In 1892, Barry effectively severed his ties with the Labour movement by a public defence of his employment as a Conservative agent.'' This was the last straw; Engels, who had declined to give credence to earlier rumours, now severed relations with him.'^ To others, the admission conflrmed retrospectively all the calumnies and criticisms that had circulated on Barry's account." The last nail in the coffin of Barry's reputation was driven home by W. CoUison, the 'apostle of free [i.e. scab] labour'. After Barry's death in 1909, Collison asserted that all along he had 'determined to undermine the growth of Radicalism and Socialism . . .'^^ Such judgements are unacceptable. Much of Barry's notoriety can be traced to a conflation of gossip and innuendo dating from 1872, and charges levied against him twenty years later: Barry was aTory agent in 1892, he must have been one in 1872. I have argued, on the contrary, that the study of Barry's political commitments over this period leads to quite different conclusions. If there is one generalization that can be made of Barry's activity over this period of twenty years, it is that he began, remained and ended as an outsider. The most striking feature of Barry's career, his joumalism, his relations with Marx and Engels, his Socialism, is that it is impossible to situate him within the mainstream ofthe English Labour movement. He was, as a critic remarked, 'the enemy ofthe old school of Trade Unionists and Liberals'.*' Barry was not a 'recognized leader of working men', indeed he repudiated what he regarded as such a dubious title. It is, I would suggest, precisely Barry's determination, his courage, and, his furious criticism ofthe toadying of some ofthe English Labour leaders which explains the animus that has existed against him. Barry's isolation, his notoriety and the magnificent failure ofthe 'People's Charter' are implicit in his eloquent 'Plea for Revolution', which appeared shortly afterwards: 'In Germany, a Marx is exiled, and Bebel and Liebknecht cast into prison. In France, a Blanqui passes his life in State dungeons; Rossel is executed in cold blood on bleak Satory's plain, Delescluze yields up that life dedicated to Humanity behind a barricade; and the gutters run with the red rich blood of her heroic children. In England, John Bright kisses hands at Court as a Privy Councillor; Beales is banished to a provincial County Court; and the smaller fry, the sham leaders ofthe working class, the Potters, Howells and MacDonalds, are swallowed by the patronage of our Brassey's, Morleys and Mundellas. The superiority of the English system is transparent. In other countries the persecuted leaders of the people incite to active rebellion their oppressed followers. In England, place-hunting agitators divide their energies between efforts to repress the discontent of workmen with their economical condition and cringing demonstrations of subserviency towards their wealthy middle-class political patrons. In this way the spirit of the people is broken, their ardour damped, their sympathies wasted, their ideals disgraced, their hopes blasted, their cause betrayed, and their subjugation perpetuated.'*^ PAUL MARTINEZ 38