THE INTERNATIONAL^344and others, who had done away with nationalities, had spoken "French" to
us, i.e. a language which nine-tenths of the audience did not understand.'^56
At the Geneva Congress the majority of delegates were Franco-Swiss
thirty-three out of about sixty - and there was a large French contingent
also. To meet the inevitable challenge from the French, Marx - who
personally attended only the final Hague Congress of the International
(in 1872 ) - drew up detailed instructions for the General Council dele-
gates which were confined 'to such points as permit the immediate agree-
ment and co-operation of workers and provide direct force and impetus
to the needs of the class struggle and the organisation of the workers
into a class'.^57 Social questions occupied most of the agenda. Marx's
instructions stressed the necessity of trade unions in the battle against
capital and their future role as 'organising centres of the working class in
the broad interest of its complete emancipation';^58 these proposals were
modified by a French amendment on justice and 'reciprocity' as the
final aim. The French also opposed unsuccessfully the General Council's
resolution on the legal enactment of the eight-hour working day as they
did not believe in using the state as a reforming agency. Marx's statements
on child labour as a 'progressive, sound and legitimate tendency' although
under capital it was 'distorted into an abomination'^59 met with no oppo-
sition; but the Proudhonists got an amendment passed which prohibited
female labour.
Marx's view that standing armies should eventually be replaced by 'the
general arming of the people and their general instruction in the use of
arms'^60 was also endorsed without opposition. He had instructed that the
problems of international credit and religious ideas should 'be left to
the initiative of the French'. Inevitably the Polish question figured again
and Marx's views met with strong opposition as the French produced a
remarkable counter-resolution which read: 'We, partisans of freedom,
protest against all despotisms; we emphatically condemn and denounce
the organisation and social tendencies of Russian despotism, as leading
inevitably to the most brutalising form of communism; but, being dele-
gates at an economic congress, we consider that we have nothing to say
concerning the political reconstruction of Poland.'^6 ' The Proudhonists
did not share what they considered to be Marx's 'Russophobia' and did
not see why Russian despotism should be more specifically condemned
than any other. The Congress eventually adopted a compromise res-
olution, proposed by Becker, which was nearer to the French proposal
and implied a defeat for Marx. In the debate on organisation, Tolain again
proposed that only workers should be admitted as delegates to congresses.
Cremer, in reply, said that in Britain much was owed to middle-class
members. 'Among those members', he added, 'I will mention only one,