The Socialist Party’s right-wing leadership majority long had it out for the International Socialist Review. As William D. Haywood’s successful 1911 run for the seven-person National Executive came to its conclusion, accusations and insinuations were directed at the magazine, which was not a party organ, by the right. Eventually the only charge to be brought, by John Spargo, was misuse of ISR funds to influence the election. An investigation quickly exonerating the venerable journal. Here, publisher Charles H. Kerr defiantly responds to the slanders and the slanderers.

‘Reply to N.E.C. Members’ by Charles H. Kerr from The New York Call. Vol. 4 No. 352. December 18, 1911.

Editor of The Call:

Several charges, false on their face to any one in the least familiar with the facts, have been repeated so often in the party press that a denial becomes necessary.

These charges are directed against Charles H. Kerr & Co., and the International Socialist Review in general, and against William D. Haywood and Frank Bohn in particular.

The attacks have come in three forms. First, an official motion with comment by Robert Hunter of the National Executive Committee; second, various letters by Hunter, Hillquite and Spargo. supplemented by editorial paragraphs in the Social Democratic Herald: third, written and verbal communications to the various party locals from these men and their supporters. These last are perhaps the most dangerous because of their vague and indefinite character, which makes any complete answer difficult.

John Spargo, apparently less clever at insinuations than his associates, resorts to a direct and absurd falsehood over his own signature. He charges our publishing house with using the funds of its stockholders to circularize the party locals as well as individuals to bring about the election of Comrade Haywood and Bohn to the National Executive Committee. This is simply a lie. We challenge John Spargo to produce a single circular sent from this office to any local or individual to make votes for Haywood and Bohn. Neither has the Review published a line in its pages which I can truthfully be described as “electioneering.” Read our December issue from beginning to end, and not even a reference to the party election will be found, apart from the letters of acceptance by Comrades Haywood and Bohn, which were also published in both Socialist dailies.

As for Robert Hunter’s motion that the National Committee be instructed to investigate our publishing house. it need only be said that such an investigation would be welcomed by us. since it would bring forcibly to the attention of party members the importance of the work we are doing in furnishing at the lowest possible figures the standard books and pamphlets explaining the principles of Socialism. His comment, however, contains a guarded insinuation directed against Comrade Haywood, which, if not exposed, might injure Haywood in the minds of Comrades unacquainted with the facts.

Hunter intimates that a local holding a Haywood meeting is required to pay Charles H. Kerr & Co. $250 for Review subscriptions, out of which it is alleged that Haywood gets $50. Now the fact is, as all Comrades who have managed Haywood meetings know, that we ask the local to guarantee not $250, but $100, in other words the local takes 500 three-month subscriptions at 25 cents each and we allow the Comrades to keep $25 for hall rent. Out of the $100 paid us we pay the cost of filling the 500 subscriptions, we give the local 200 copies of the Review to be sold at 10 cents each for the local’s benefit, we furnish the necessary printed matter for advertising the meeting, and we pay for Haywood’s railroad fare and hotel bills, as well as his services. A little figuring will enable any Comrade to judge for himself how much of a margin is left for graft, either for Haywood’s benefit or for any of the Comrades who are said to hold “fat jobs” in the office of Charles H. Kerr & Co. The whole charge would be too ridiculous to mention, but for the fact that our silence might cause certain Comrades to misjudge William D. Haywood. The motive behind these attacks is all plain enough. The reactionary majority of the present National Executive Committee, find their power and influence slipping away. They are many sizes too small for the positions they happen to occupy. They have attempted to run a great revolutionary movement by methods of petty intrigue and egotistic usurpation of power which have long since disgusted a majority of the membership. Behind them they have a minority, only a small fraction of which is composed of place seekers like themselves, while most of their support comes from loyal Comrades whom they have deceived and hope to continue deceiving as before…

They control many channels of communication between party members and are scheming to control more. The International Socialist Review they cannot control and therefore they aim to kill it or discredit it. They will not succeed. If the Review stood for the personal ambitions and interests of any one man or any little group of men, it would not be formidable enough to arouse these bitter attacks from our tottering dictators. If the Review has any strength, and our enemies think it has, that strength comes from the fact that our aim and our constant endeavor is to voice the thoughts and the will of the workers who make up the essential and vital part of the Socialist movement. And sooner or later, they will find a way to make their will prevail, and the petty politicians will have to make way for men who will carry out the wishes of the workers.

CHARLES H. KERR. Chicago, Ill.

The New York Call was the first English-language Socialist daily paper in New York City and the second in the US after the Chicago Daily Socialist. The paper was the center-right of the Socialist Party and under the influence of Morris Hillquit. The paper is an invaluable resource for information on the city’s workers movement and history, it is one of the most important socialist papers in US history. The Call ran from 1908 until 1923, when the Socialist Party’s membership was in deep decline and the Communist movement became predominate.

PDF of issue: https://www.marxists.org/history/usa/pubs/the-new-york-call/1911/111218-newyorkcall-v04n352.pdf