r motives disparaged:
they retaliated by accusing the British troops of incredible atrocities,
by rejoicing over every disaster which befell our arms, and by
prophesying all sorts of calamities however the war ended. There was
never any question of the Society issuing a pronouncement justifying
the war. Only a very few of our members went as far as that. But many
others, all or nearly all who were now beginning to be called the "old
gang," on whom from first to last the initiative and stability of the
Society has depended, would have declined to be associated with what
they regarded as the anti-patriotic excesses of certain of the Liberals,
and would have resigned their membership, or at any rate their official
positions in the Society, had it adopted at that time the same policy as
the I.L.P. Happily tolerance prevailed, and although an attempt was made
to get up a big secession, only about fifteen members resigned in a
group when the result of the poll was declared. These, however, included
a few important names, J. Ramsay Macdonald and J. Frederick Green, of
the Executive Committee, George N. Barnes and Pete Curran, future Labour
Members of Parliament, Walter Crane, H.S. Salt, Mrs. J.R. Macdonald, and
Mrs. Pankhurst.

At the election of the Executive Committee in April, 1900, the Society
by another vote confirmed the previous decision. All the old members
were re-elected, and those of the majority party polled the heaviest
votes. The two seats vacated by resignation were filled by "Pro-Boers,"
and the only new candidate who supported the majority was defeated. It
was clear, therefore, that the voting was not strictly on party
lines--one of the opposition, Charles Charrington, was fourth on the
poll--but that the Society as a whole approved of the non-committal
policy. The Executive Committee had been elected since 1894 by a postal
ballot of the whole Society, and on this occasion 509 members, over 62
per cent of the whole, recorded their votes.

The Executive had resolved at the beginning of the war to issue a tract
on Imperialism, and at the Annual Meeting in May, 1900, a resolution
was passed that it prepare for submission to the members "a constructive
criticism from the Socialist standpoint of the actions and programmes of
the various political parties."

Needless to say, Bernard Shaw undertook the difficult job, for at this
period all the official pronouncements of the Executive were drafted by
him. At the be