No More Learning

He has full authority to appoint or dismiss the vice-president, chief director, directors, councillors and other officials of the association and may also dismiss any director or directors, with the permission of the competent Minister, of a member company or organization, when he considers that their deeds are harmful to the conduct of the affairs of the association. The business of the association in regard to materials, funds and labor required for production equipment will thus be oper- ated under the guidance and direction of the president. Products of the industry concerned are not permitted to be sold without his consent. ^*
If the need arises, a supreme central organ embracing all these control associations will be set up.
Commenting on the control associations in the New Structure plans, the London Economist (July 12, 1941), declared: "The scheme, when it emerged, was so emasculated that public corpora- tions which had been planned were now nothing but private cartels under another name. " Up to December, 1941, three control associations were established: in the iron and steel, coal, and ship- ping industries. Hachisaburo Hirao, head of the Iron and Steel Manufacturers' Federation, and for forty years the able managing director of the Mitsubishi subsidiary, Tokyo Marine and Fire Insurance Co. , became president of the Iron and Steel Control Asso- ciation. The Federation of Coal Mine Owners* Association dis- solved and emerged as the Coal Control Association, with the presi- dent of the former, Kenjiro Matsumoto, becoming the president of
the latter organization. Mr. Matsumoto is also a director of the Mitsui Trust Co. In November, 1940, the Central Shipping Fed- eration, headed by Noboru Ohtani, for many years the president of Mitsubishi's huge Nippon Yusen Kaisha, changed its name to the Central Marine Transportation Control Association. A year later, the latter was reorganized into the present Shipping Control Asso- ciation with Mr. Ohtani as the president. (R)^
86 Oriental Economist, Sept. , 1941, p. 460.
87 The correctness of the London Economist's comments is also shown in the case
? ii8 KOKUTAI AND CO-PROSPERITY
With the Association for Assisting the Throne serving as the su- preme ideological coordinator for both the Supreme Economic Council and the Supreme Cultural Council and as official bearer of the doctrinal position allied to Shinto, Bushido, and the fanatical worship of Amaterasu-O-Mikami (sun goddess, the legendary an- cestress of the imperial house), the means will stand at hand for the final fusing together of the upper reaches of the existing hier- archies into a caste-like state. Close alliance among the cliques, inter- marriage,^^ and similar fusions had already gone far towards smoothing the road before the appearance of the single party state. (R)^ And that state is a symbiosis clearly dominated by an econ-
of the particular control associations which were in the process of establishment when the U. S -Japanese war broke out. Thus the Osaka Mainichi and Tokyo Nichi Nichi (English) of Sept. 24, 1941, declares: "it has become certain that the association (Nippon Warehouse Association) will be designated as a control association," with Shinzo Mihashi, president of Mitsubishi Warehouse Co. and the Nippon Warehouse Association becoming the president of the control association. The trade-control association seems likely to be headed by Ginjiro Fujihara (see footnote 80, above).
88 It has not been possible to check the following, but the picture it submits seems highly probable in view of subsequent developments: "All the big monopolist con- cerns maintain very close personal contacts with the Court, the high bureaucracy, the high nobility, government circles, and with the leaders of the two big political parties (the Seiyukai and the Minseito).
"Thus, the Japanese Emperor is personally interested in the Mitsubishi concern. One of the daughters of Iwasaki (head of the concern) married the late leader of the Minseito Party, Kato; another married the Minister of Foreign Affairs in the last Minseito government, Shidehara; and a third married the Minister of Finance in the same government, Inouye, who was assassinated in 1932. One of the principals of the Mitsui concern, Fujiwara Ginjiro [see footnote 80 above], is a member of the House of Peers; another, Yamamoto Jotaro, is a prominent leader of the Seyukai Party.
"One of the most prominent feudal aristocrats. Prince Saionji (the last member of the Genro), is a brother of the founder of the Sumitomo concern, and an uncle of its present owner.
"Of the Yasuda concern, Takahashi Koreikiyo is one of the leaders of the Seiyukai; Mori Hirozo is chairman of the Government Bank of Taiwan and Shijo Takahide was formerly Minister of Commerce and Industry. " E. Varga and L. Mendelsohn, New Data for V. I. Lenin's "Imperialism: the Highest Stage of Capitalism" (New York, 1938), pp. 105, 107.
89 Speaking of the growth of the single-party idea, a correspondent, M. B. Thresher, in a recent issue of Oriental Affairs (July, 1940) writes, "Mr. Chuji Machida, Presi- dent of the majority party, the Minseito, made his endorsement of the plan de- pendent on the acceptance by Prince Konoye of the leadership of the projected party. Prince Konoye, true to form, raised objections to assuming the post, the prin- cipal one being that he was President of the Privy Council. His resignation of this office on June 24th is naturally taken to indicate that the stage is now set for the establishment of a single party under his leadership. " Simultaneously, conversations with the Axis powers took on a more serious tone: "On June 22nd, the Parliamentary League for Attainment of the Objectives of the Sacred Campaign (the Chinese cam-
? KOKUTAI AND CO-PROSPERITY 119
omy in which policy-forming powers are so centralized and held that it may most appropriately be described on its economic side as a regime of monopoly-organized status--not state--capitalism.
paign), addressed to Hitler a copy of a resolution expressing their admiration for the great achievements of the Reich, and their hope that it would go on to destroy Jewish control of the World. The Social Mass Party issued a statement about the same time urging the Government to strengthen the Axis and cease negotiating with Britain and the U. S. A. " The fruits of this shift are already apparent today: in the formation of the Supreme Economic and Supreme Cultural Councils, in NMAT and the establishment of AAT, in the appointment of Mr. Ogura to the position of an "economic dictator. " The group centered around Matsuoka, himself closely allied to the Zaibatsu, has come to the fore with what appears to be at once an effective single-party and a greater empire formula. The anti-Comintern Pact has been fol- lowed by the Berlin-Rome-Tokyo pact. With the opening of the Burma road the adventure in Indo-China and the general Drang nach Suden the country is stripping for action in a major war. The last vestiges of parliamentary forms of government and popular participation are rapidly being liquidated. The militarily omnicompe- tent, economically coordinated, politically streamlined, inherently expansionist, patri- archally guided, oriental variant of totalitarian status capitalism emerges.
--
? Chapter IV
FRANCE: THROUGH DOUBLE DEFEAT TO VICHY'S "NEW ORDER"
THE Confederation Generale du Patronat Fran^ais (CGPF) represents almost the ultimate in expression of that "inherent tendency to combine and form ever larger business units"/ which goes back beyond the earliest days of the industrial system into France's earlier and all-embracing system of medieval guilds. Though not a "combination" itself in the ordinary technical usage of that term, it has nevertheless clearly arisen as a by-product of the concentration movement and, before its recent dissolution,^ the ex- pansion of its functions had been halted but a single pace short of the establishment of a "corporative system" structurally coextensive with national and imperial frontiers. There is some evidence that under the most recent Petain regime the last step has already been taken. If so, the pattern of control evolved over the past decades is now in process of being fully rounded out and France stands in the
ante-room of a formally Fascist-type state.
Whether this last is yet true or not ^ does not greatly matter. What
is significant is the fact that such a transition, in full keeping structurally, functionally, and in terms of social outlook--with past lines of development in the evolution of employers' central policy- forming bodies in France, could be made without seriously up- setting any institutions, conventions, or interests except those opposed to the advance of groups who stand to gain from inaugu-
1 William F. Ogburn and William Jaff^, Social and Economic Studies of Post-War France (New York, 1929), p. 552.
2 The Confederation was formally dissolved shortly after the German victory; this, it appears, was a preliminary to general reorganization of French economic life con- sonant with past trends but more clearly patterned after the German (rather than the Italian) totalitarian model than was previously the case.
3 See pp. 145-49.
? VICHY'S "NEW ORDER" 121
ration of the "corporate state. " That this could be true of a country but yesterday still so imbued with the popular ideas and democratic values transmuted from the French Revolution is of far greater moment than that these ideas and values should have been, even temporarily, submerged. For it would then clearly demonstrate that "Fascism" was not so much imposed by a militarily victorious totali- tarian power from without, as that it had been evolved through more or less "normal" processes from within, by elements which found in the war an auspicious occasion for thus consolidating a power which had been gravely threatened in recent times (by the "Popular Front" movement), and which they now hoped at long last to be able, through control over the political machinery, fully to wield. What these "normal" processes are remains to be seen.
origins: a period of ''freedom of association"
The CGPF, as it stood at the moment of its dissolution, was the product of a thorough reorganization in 1936 following the con- clusion of the famous Matignon Agreement between its predeces- sor organization, the General Confederation of French Production (Confederation Generale de la Production Fran^aise), and the General Confederation of Labor (Confederation Generale du Tra- vail--CGT). This predecessor body was, like similar organizations in England and Germany, a "war baby," having been "called into existence" in 1919 by M. Clementel,* Minister of Commerce, to aid in the reorganization of French economic life after the First World War.
Behind this latest attempt at the creation of a vast and all- inclusive syndical organization of industry lay a long period of ex- perimentation with less comprehensive forms. And these, para- doxically, first took root in the midst of a swiftly proliferating meshwork of local, occupational, and regional employer associa- tions at a time when France, far more completely than any other modern industrial country, was formally and legally committed to absolute prohibition of all forms of association whatsoever. Under the famous Le Chapelier law of 1791, an attempt was made to wipe out all vestiges of guild organization, but in so doing a prohibition
* Ren^ P. Duchemin, Organisation syndicate patronale en France (Paris, 1940), p. 1.
? 122 VICHY'S 'NEW ORDER"
was laid on every conceivable type of private association designed in any manner to promote common interests, whether of laborers, employers, or any other special interest group. ^
Legal freedom from this interdict first came with the promulga- tion of the Act of March 21, 1884, "respecting the foundation of industrial associations," a law subsequently widened and general- ized by an act passed July 1, 1901. ^ In the meantime, however, the prohibition did not seem to have seriously hampered, or even greatly to have slowed down, the formation of employers' associa- tions. Nor did it entirely prevent the formation of workers' or- ganizations, though clearly the history of enforcement under the interdict shows that the act was designed more to prevent the rise of workers' organizations than to inhibit ekpression of employer solidarity. ^ "By 1881 there were in Paris alone 130 employers' asso- ciations, with 15,000 members, and 150 workers' organizations, with 60,000 members, while 350 workers' organizations were in
^
existence in the province. "
It is interesting to note, in passing, that the central issue in-
volved in passage of the new laws was not mere "freedom of asso- ciations. " Whereas Le Chapelier desired to prohibit private asso- ciations as such, in 1884 debate turned only on the matter of whether membership should be voluntary and free, or compulsory and "corporate. " This was because in the earlier period all associa- tions were regarded as "corporate" per se, or as direct carry-overs of
6 Noteworthy are the two following sections of the Act:
Section 1. Since the abolition of all forms of corporations in the same grade or occupation is one of the bases of the constitution, it is forbidden to recreate such corporations under any pretext whatever.
Section 2. Citizens of the same grade or occupation, and workers or journeymen in any art or craft, may not, when assembled together, appoint a president, a secretary or an alderman, keep a register, enact decisions or establish any regulations concern- ing what they call their common interests. Quoted in Freedom of Association (Inter- national Labor Office, Geneva, 1927), II, 90.
6 Laws passed in 1849 and again in 1864 considerably modified the unfair incidence and severe penalties formerly imposed under the Le Chapelier law.
7 "Statistics show that while legal penalties were seldom imposed upon employers, workers organizations, including those of the most harmless character, were ruth- lessly suppressed. . . . During the reign of Louis Philippe the relative proportion of prosecutions was as follows: one employers' association for eight workers', 40 per- cent of the employers were acquitted as against 5 per cent of the workers. " ILO, Freedom of Association, II, 93.
8 Ibid. , p. 98.
? VICHY'S "NEW ORDER'* 123
specialized feudal privileges. Passed in 1791 in the early days of the French Revolution, the law of Le Chapelier expressed the desire of the rising commercial, trading, and industrial classes to be rid of that vast, cramping network of guild and feudal restrictions which Colbert had attempted to liquidate by nationalizing, and Turgot had hoped to sweep away entirely.
Once on the statute books, the law proved of special value in preventing the rise of labor organizations (since these were held to be inherently of a "corporative" character); but it did not wholly prohibit various forms of commercial and employer collusion (since the employers still lacked any real sentiment for all-inclusive group action). By the decade of the eighties, however, sentiment in busi- ness circles for the principles of "free competition" and "laissez faire" was being rapidly undermined in France as elsewhere. To employers it then became desirable to remove the formal prohibi- tions on employer associations. They wished to enjoy powers of association of at least a semicorporate character, while adhering to the principle of "freedom of association" as a basis on which to deny the comprehensive demands which organized labor might see fit to make, if vested with power to compel all workers to join and to bargain collectively for entire industries. Once the level of organization in employer groups had itself approached such limits, agitation for a reversal of the 1884 formula began to appear, and we find a return to the organizational pattern of pre-Le Chapelier France. (R)
So to state the case, however, is apt to be slightly misleading, since it tends to gloss over certain facts of unique importance to an understanding of the peculiar susceptibility of France to "cor- porate" forms of organization. French production is still primarily small scale, specialized, in many respects highly localized, and--by comparison with England, Germany, and the United States--rela- tively free of large-scale trusts and combinations. ^^ This fact might be expected to discourage corporate ideas. Yet even before large-
9 See pp. 127 ff.
10 It might be more accurate to state that both factors exist in France. A large number of small and middle-sized businesses as well as high concentration can be found. Examples of large-scale trusts are as follows: iron and steel industry; chemical industry; machine building; production of electric power; fuel production.
--
? 124 VICHY'S "NEW ORDER"
scale concentration began to make much headway in France, the main discussion in economic organization turned directly on that issue.
The answer to this paradox seems to lie in the fact that France, somewhat similarly to Germany and Japan (and in sharp contra- distinction to England and the United States), never really got wholly rid of medieval guild "corporate" forms of organization at all. ^^ Nowhere else is the gap between de jure and de facto (prior to the law of 1884) so great as in France. During this period, local, regional, and in many cases national associations of handicrafts- men, trading and commercial interests, and workmen--frequently disguised under the form of various friendly and benefit societies continued to exist. Such associations not only continued to exist but were strongly influenced throughout by codes of conduct, methods of working together, organizational biases, and a sense of quasi-professional group solidarity strongly reminiscent of, if not as was frequently the case--directly traceable to, medieval times.
The relatively small-scale nature of French economic activity proved, consequently, rather a strength than a weakness in taking advantage of the forms of organization allowed when the ban was raised in 1884. More than that, for many industries, and in many rather peculiar ways, the trade association became not a secondary but a primary form of organization, quickly assuming functions and representing interests, and even, in some cases, communities of interest, comparable to those of the cartels, trade associations, and semifraternal associations (such as Kiwanis and Rotary). This was true even when the trade association had relatively little power, since the prevailing conception of its function was such as to make it useful along all these lines, whenever the occasion should arise.
It is, thus, not surprising that the passage of the laws of 1884 and 1901 should be paralleled by rapid spread of the associational net- work. An American observer in 1916 wrote that he found "in France . . . nearly 5,000 employers' associations, having a mem- bership of over 400,000; and about as many commercial associa- tions, with an equal membership. " These were in turn "in a manner regulated by law and joined by affiliation into member associa-
11 This is true mainly of the handicrafts. The trade associations of industry and commerce are nineteenth-century children.
? VICHY'S "NEW ORDER" 125
tions, which in turn are joined into the principal or controlling organization with headquarters in Paris, and all working with very great success for the interests of French industry and commerce. " ^^
The tendency to draw separate organizations together into fed- erations evidenced itself at an early date. The first 'Tederation of Industrial Associations (Chambre syndicale) known under the name of the Groupe de la Saint-Chapelle" was organized in 1821 by the Carpentry Association. "The year 1858 saw the beginnings, on similar lines to the Saint-Chapelle Groupe, of the National Union of Commerce and Industry, which by 1869 included 55 industrial associations representing industries other than the building trade. " ^^ In 1859 the first effort was made to bring all existing associations into a national confederation by the formation of the National Union of Commerce and Industry. Others followed in short order.
The Central Committee of Trade Associations (1867) was intended to provide a central organization to include both the building trades and the National Union. The Commercial and Industrial Alliance (1896) in its rules provided for specialized committees, and marks a higher degree of development. Finally, the Federation of French Manufacturers and Merchants, founded in 1903, provided for the institution of regional committees and delegates from the various departments, and endeav- ored to group its members in sections, but without taking the goods manufactured as the basis of classification. ^*
The object of the first national federations was clear: "to make sure that they were not unions only of certain professions (trades, industries) but of all employers" the better to speak on behalf of "collective interests" of French employers as a whole. ^^ According to the survey of the International Labour Office this interest was
12 In a speech delivered by Mr. D. E. Felt, Vice-President of the Illinois Manu- facturers' Association, and reproduced in American Industries, June, 1916, p. 15, it was argued, "In Germany and in France, organization of manufacturers is compul- sory. In France, there must be at least one for each department, and the law imposes upon them the duty of advising the Government and the legislators on all industrial and commercial matters. They are, in part, supported by a tax. " I have been unable to find any support for the assertion that the associations referred to enjoyed any direct government authority or support whatsoever.
18 ILO, Freedom of Association, II, 92.
1* "Employers' Organisations in France," International Labour Review, July, 1927, PP- 50-77-
15 See, in particular, Etienne Villey, L'Organisation professionnelle des employeurs dans I'industrie frangaise (Paris, 1923).
? 126 VICHY'S "NEW ORDER"
pursued through three distinct phases of development after 1884.
*
The first was a 'preparatory period" (1884-1900) characterized
primarily by educational efforts designed to create among employ- ers "an atmosphere of mutual confidence" and to encourage "meas- ures calculated to promote useful but restricted cooperation between industrial establishments. " This was followed by a period of "defensive tactics," in which they proceeded to take measures against the "possible results of the development of social legisla- tion," against "international competition," and against the rising power of the trade unions, particularly the CGT (Confederation Generale du Travail). ^^
The results of this second period were enormously to increase membership in the "primary employers' associations, the member- ship of which doubled between 1900 and 1908, and to give more life and force to the unions and federations of associations. " But even more significantly, "a general plan or organization . . . for each branch of production and inter-trade agreements arose and prepared the way for an all-inclusive concentration. " ^^
The third phase was ushered in by the World War. This period the International Labor Office refers to as "the phase of action," and the action developed on the initiative of the government:
During hostilities the State had the monopoly of the markets; being the sole client giving orders it was in the position to insist on concentration. In order to intensify production and to impart flexibility unto the run- ning of the establishments it brought about the formation in each branch of industry of powerful central organizations or syndicates which linked up the individual establishments. ^^
French war organization had the effect of spreading out organi- zational networks so as to include in some fashion or other nearly the whole of the business system, while at the same time vesting the association, for all practical purposes, with the powers of semi- autonomous, compulsory cartels. With the end of the war, govern- mental pressures along these lines were not greatly relaxed. Con- versations running throughout 1918 led in 1919 to the demand of
M. Clementel that special efforts be made to draw together the heads of this vast associational apparatus into a single centralized
16 ILO, Freedom of Association, II, 102-3.
17 Ibid. , p. 103. 18 Ibid. , p. 104.
? VICHY'S "NEW ORDER" 127
body, able to speak with an authoritative voice for all French in- dustry on all matters relating to business and national interest. The result was the founding in 1919 of the Confederation g^nerale de la Production Fran^aise (CGPF).
In the words of M. Duchemin, President and leading spokesman of the CGPF from 1925 to 1936, the purpose of the CGPF was
to enable the Department of Commerce, through the creation of a vast syndical organization, formed on the demand of government but rigor- ously independent of it, to possess at all times the information and knowledge of trends which seemed indispensable to it in resolving in- numerable economic problems as they arose, and to take the necessary steps on behalf of the national welfare. ^(R)
The purpose was simply and clearly to provide,^^
in a word, our country with a federative organization similar to those which exist at the present time in a number of foreign countries, such as,
The Federation of German Industries
The Federation of British Industries
The United States Chamber of Commerce 21
The Central Union of Swiss Employers' Associations The Central Industrial Committee of Belgium.
Through such a body, the employers and the Minister of Com- merce hoped to develop among industrialists "the habit of working in common, of reconciling their various conflicts, and of evolving means for harmonious development of their productive opera- tions. " 22 Here, then, is the French redaction of the formula, "self- government in business": all-inclusive organization of industry into private and centralized associations, functioning with, but entirely independent of, formal government control, in order to pool business information, agree on common lines of business policy, and work towards common business ends.
FROM 1919 TO THE MATIGNON AGREEMENT
"The new confederation has for its object to assemble and bind together all the innumerable associations [syndicats] scattered over the entire national territory. " ^3 its method was to organize con-
19 Duchemin, Organisation syndicate, p. 2. 20 ibid.
21 The proper comparison here, of course, is with the National Association of Manufacturers, not the United States Chamber of Commerce*
22 Duchemin, loc. cit. 23 jbid. , p. 3.
.
?
VICHY'S "NEW ORDER"
stituent association in groups, and then to develop and expand the work of the groups in all directions. Collective action was to be coextensive with range of business interests:
There is not a single question, whether it be documentary or technical, fiscal or relating to customs tariffs, economic or social, whether relating to the organization of production or concerted lock-outs, whether deal- ing with a common wages policy or strike-breaking measures, which is not thoroughly studied by the special departments of the organizations, or which does not provide an opportunity for direct negotiations with the authorities. 2*
The manner of grouping industries together was designed to facilitate to the utmost such promotion of collective interests. The initial plan (July 4, 1919) divided industry into 21 groups. After the modification of October, 1919, these appeared as follows:
1. Processing of Agricultural Products
2. FoodstuffsIndustries
3. Public Works; Construction; Housing
4. Quarrying; Ceramics; Glass-works
5. LeatherandHides
6. Textile Industries (Production)
7. ClothingandRelatedIndustries 8. ChemicalIndustries
9. MiningIndustries
10. HeavyMetallurgy 11 Light Metallurgy
12. Building: Mechanical, Metallurgical, Electrical
13. Engineering; Copper Smithing; Foundries
14. Electricity; Public Lighting; Tramways
15. Maritime Industries; Transport
16. Aeronautics; Automobiles; Cycles
17. Precision Instruments
18. Publishing; Paper Making; Graphic Arts 19. Arts and Luxuries
20. Finance and Commerce
2 1 Travel, Tourist, and Hotel Industries
Subsequently several changes in groupings were made, and several new groups formed. ^**
2* ILO, Freedom of Association, II, 104.
25 In 1922, Group 22 (Railroads) and Group 23 (Insurance); in 1923, Group 24 (Foreign Trade) and Group 25 (Regional Associations); in 1926, Group 26 (Wood Industry and Trade in Wood); in 1929, Group 27 (Internal Navigation) and Group 28 (Colonial Enterprises).
128
? VICHY'S "NEW ORDER"
These Groups, remarkably similar to those captioned Economic Groups in the National Economic Chamber established under the Nazi regime in 1933, were designed to serve as coordinating bodies for a wide variety of subsidiary business organizations. These latter may be national, regional, or local; they may be concerned exclu- sively with business problems such as price and production con- trol, or exclusively with employer issues, or with a wide variety of social and economic questions; they may represent but a single trade, or a federation of trades organizations of one sort or another; they may exercise coercion over members to compel conformity
with group decisions (or with cartels or comptoirs), or may be ex- tremely loose and weak. It may help somewhat to simplify the story in subsequent pages to arrange the leading types according to the following broad classification: ^o
NATIONAL ASSOCIATIONS
Classification
Comptoirs (or cartels): single-com- modity contractual agreements (may also be regional, interna- tional and for groups of com- modities
Examples
Syndicats: trade associations of Iron-Works Committee (Comite
specialized trades
Federations: grouped out of syn-
dicate and trade associations
Confederations: grouped out of General Confederation of French
closely allied Federations and/or Production syndicats
REGIONAL ASSOCIATIONS
Syndicats: single-trade associations
intertrade associations
Federations: single trade
Calais Metal Industries Associa- tions
Groups for Paris and district, Nantes, Marseilles
Champagne Iron and Steel Com- mittee
26 ILO, Freedom of Association, II, 104. See also Archibald
Organizations in France (Special Agents Series, No. 98, U. S. Dept. of Commerce, Washington, D. C. , 1915), and "Employers' Organisations in France," International Labour Review, July, 1929.
des Forges)
Union of Metal and Mining In-
dustries
J.
Wolfe, Commercial
129
? 130 VICHY'S "NEW ORDER"
Classification Examples
intertrade
(a) Regional federations of Lyons Federation of Industrial
local associations in the Associations
region
(b) Regional federations of Gironde Economic Federation of
industrial and commer- Employers' associations
cial unions in the region
Confederations Confederation of Commercial and
Industrial Groups of France ^^
In addition to these there are several other groupings of special- ized employer interests which are difficult to classify. Such for ex- ample are the regional organizations like the Industrial Societies of Amiens, Elbeuf, Lille, Nancy, Alsace, Reims, Mulhouse, Rou- baix, whose "special aim . . . is to increase efficiency," and the "Regional Committees of the National Association for Economic Expansion. " Analogous national organizations are the Union of Industrial Societies of France, which holds a biennial congress but has no permanent secretariat, and the National Association for Economic Expansion. There are also many different types of tech- nical and semitechnical bodies centered around business interests which are too numerous and too difficult to classify for inclusion here. 2^
The term "Federation" is quite commonly used loosely to apply to all these groups except the Comptoirs and the national Con- federations. They
are not all organized in the same way; their internal organization de- pends on and to some extent indicates their strength. But they all ap- proximate more or less to the same type. In all cases there are the standard organs, a general meeting delegating very wide powers to a managing council. In the case of federations and in the larger associa- tions, where the members belong to different specialized branches within a single manufacturing group, autonomous sections with their own officers and independent activities are formed within the federa- tion or association in the general scheme of organization. Thus the
27 This is the central headquarters of the industrial and commercial federations in existence since the war, while the Federation of Regional Associations "includes re- gional organizations of all kinds, but especially those of the type described as 'in- dustrial, commercial, and agricultural associations. ' " "Employers' Orzanisations in France,"
28 E. g. . Central Interprofessional Committee of Apprenticeship, and the various committees concerned with technical and managerial problems of rationalization.
? VICHY'S "NEW ORDER" 131
Union of Employers' Associations of the Textile Industries comprises cotton, linen, wool, silk, and jute sections; the General Association of Metal Founders comprises four sections for steel, copper and bronze, aluminium, and malleable iron; the Association of Engineering Indus- tries is divided into 33 trade sections. In this case the groups tend to concern themselves only with technical and economic questions, while the federation attends to labor questions and social and financial prob- lems. 29
In addition, the leading federations are grouped in special com- mittees for study of various questions such as apprenticeship, labor, tariffs, prices, and so forth. Continuity is secured by permanent secretariats, sometimes equipped with considerable staff assistance. In some cases a great deal of detailed information is collected and made available to members. The leading associations all have their own regular publications. ^^
Before returning to the Group arrangement under the CGPF, it may help to give some better idea of the scope and functioning of this elaborate meshwork of employer organizations to follow the International Labor Office's description of a prominent "speci- men organization," the Iron Works Committee (Comite des Forges) and its creation, the Union of Metal and Mining Indus- tries:
The committee has its headquarters in Paris at 7 Rue de Madrid; it is managed by a board of 23 active members consisting of a president, three vice-presidents, a treasurer, and 18 other members; there are also 6 honorary members. All manufacturers belonging to the industry may belong to the organization, and likewise establishments in foreign coun- tries which have tariff agreements with France. Contributions are in proportion to gross tonnage or the number of workers employed. Each member has as many votes as the number of minimum contributions to which his contribution is equivalent up to a maximum of 20. The num- ber of members was 281 in 1921, and is now 260 (149 employing less
than 100 workers, 70 employing from 100 to 2,000, 41 employing a total of 280,000 workers).
. . . the Iron Works Committee . . . was largely instrumental in founding the Union of Metal and Mining Industries. The Union, which is higher up the scale than the Iron Works Committee in the general scheme of organizations, is composed, as often happens in em-
29 "Employers' Organisations in France. "
30 "In 1920 there were, according to the Ministry of Labour, 303 publications is- sued by employers' associations and 45 by their federations. " Ibid.
1
? VICHY'S 'NEW ORDER"
ployers' federations, of both national and regional associations. It in- cludes 58 national associations for separate trades and 59 regional asso- ciations. As a union of National associations, its task is to co-ordinate their work in social and financial questions. As a union of regional as- sociations, it endeavors to make sure that local solutions do not bring about conflicts between the interests of different areas.
Section 2 of the Rules of the Union defines its aims as follows:
The aims of the Union are:
(a) to study social, labor, and financial questions of general interest
to the industries represented by the affiliated regional associa-
tions, and to follow the application of measures relating thereto; (b) todeterminethecourseofactiontobefollowedinregardtothese
questions by the affiliated regional associations;
(c) to take part in the administration and management of social
organizations to whose establishment it has contributed, and
when they become autonomous, to offer them support.
(d) to represent the affiliated regional associations whenever com-
bined action in these matters becomes necessary.
The Union may also, in accordance with the conditions laid down in section 1 1 below, examine questions of a technical, economic, or voca- tional nature over which divergences of interest might arise between affiliated regional associations, and endeavor to establish an agree- ment between them in this respect.
When an agreement has been reached, the Union may see that it is carried out, and, if necessary, may sustain its conclusions before the public authorities.
In addition to its year book, the Union publishes a monthly review
dealing with social, labor, and financial questions, containing as a rule articles under the following headings: (1) social progress in France; (2) social progress abroad; (3) international labor legislation; (4) finan- cial questions; (5) official documents; (6) Parliamentary business;
(7) scientific management.
To this varied programme a task of conciliation is added by section 1
of the Rules. This interesting provision runs as follows:
The Board of Management of the Union . . . may, when it thinks necessary, appoint committees formed of persons belonging to the affiliated regional associations, and even of persons who do not belong to the Union but are well known to have special knowledge, to study these questions and report upon them.
It may also, either on its own initiative or on that of the regional
associations affected, or of a group to represent them, take cognizance of all questions upon which it would seem desirable, from the point of view of the general interest, that an agreement should be reached be- tween the industries belonging to the Union whose interests clash in respect of such questions. In these cases, the Board of Management
132
? VICHY'S "NEW ORDER" 133
shall use its best efforts to promote agreement, and may, if requested by the parties concerned, act as conciliator.
In 1926 the Union had about 7,000 members, employing 800,000 workers (6,000 with less than 100 workers, 1,000 with less than 2,000, 54 with more than 2,000).
Various social institutions have been founded under its auspices, such as the regional compensation funds for family allowances, the Building Credit Fund, the Cheap Housing Office, and the Anti-Tuber- culosis Association. Few employers' federations in France have reached such a high degree of organization. ^^
Since the ILO Report was written, a considerable number of associations have approximated or exceeded the level of organiza- tion described in the above.
All these various associations were then brought together in the CGPF system of Groups. Membership in the groups, consequently, was made up entirely of associations, and not of firms or individ- uals. As constituted at the time of the Matignon agreement (1936), "each group is administered by a Committee of Direction, elected each year by the General Assembly of the Groups. . . . The Com- mittee of Direction of each Group names each year its Bureau, composed, at the minimum, of a president, two vice-presidents, a treasurer and a secretary. " ^^ Except for the rule that each Group must have the appropriate machinery of the General Assembly meeting at least once a year, as well as a Committee of Direction charged with full authority to make decisions between Assembly dates, and a Central Office or Bureau, vested with duties of execu- tion, the governing Statutes of the CGPF considered each Group as an entirely autonomous, self-sufficient, and self-governing body.
It was free to admit any organization to membership it chose (pro- vided it fell into the right category), study and deliberate on any subject or line of policy, and take any action it wished, which re- lated to its own industry and trade and which did not contravene stated policies of the CGPF as a whole.
Each Committee of Direction elected its own officers. The presi- dents of the several committees (28 in number at the time of the Matignon agreement) then made up the Central Council of the Confederation generale de la Production Fran^aise. This Central
31 Ibid.
32 "Statuts Primitifs de la Confederation Generale de la Production Fran^aise," re- produced as an Appendix by Duchemin, Organization syndicate, pp. 279-84.
? 134
VICHY'S ''NEW ORDER"
Council, the supreme governing and policy-forming body of the CGPF, in turn elected its own officers, consisting of a president, five vice-presidents, a treasurer and two secretaries. It is interesting to note that this election took place after the annual General As- sembly of the CGPF, and that the resulting Bureau or Central Administration was then enabled to speak on behalf of the CGPF as a whole. When to this fact is added the additional rule that the General Assembly of the CGPF was made up of (i) four delegates (each with an alternate), elected by each Group one month prior to the General Assembly meeting, plus (2) the members of the existing Central Council--a total, for 28 Groups, of 140 persons, or, including "alternates," of 252 persons at the most--it can be seen how easily power could drift into the hands of a relatively small, compact group of determined men.
For all practical purposes, it appears that the Central Admin- istration really w^as the CGPF. It drew up all the agendas, framed the subject matter for discussion and debate, managed its system of subcommittees, acted as go-between for all the various Groups, contracted agreements and alliances with other central associations and federations of employers with which the CGPF had mutual interests,^^ represented the CGPF before governmental committees either as lobbyists or appointed members, managed all CGPF finances, and submitted all proposals for change and reorganiza- tion. The composition of the Group representatives, and of the governing officers lends further support to this view. For the most part a single leading individual, his deputy, or a small coterie of closely related individuals with closely related corporate affiliations dominated the several Groups. ^* Such continuity of control in the
33 E. g. , Union des interets ^conomiques and the Confederation des groupes com- merciaux et industrials de France.
34 Almost continuously from the beginning of the CGPF, M. Duchemin has repre- sented the Chemical Industries, Group VIII, F. de Wendel, Group X, and Baron Petiet, Group XVI. Interests represented by Duchemin centered in the Etablisse- ments Kuhlmann (capital stock of Fr. 316,500,000; assets, end of 1937, of Fr. 886,534,- 853), which is the chemical trust (synthetic nitrates and other artificial fertilizers, sulphuric and nitric acids, artificial silk, coal-tar dyes, and pharmaceutical and photo- graphic supplies), and the Compagnie des Mines d'Anzin (capital stock of Fr. 222,- 500,000; assets, end of 1937, of Fr. 1,129,819,559), a coal and coke by-products firm. Assets of the Kuhlmann concern included Fr. 139 million in participations in more
than twenty chemical and related firms. Duchemin held an official position in at least eight of these as well as in the Chemin de Fer du Nord, the Banque de Com- merce Ext^rieur, Credit Algerien, and the Union Industrielle de Credit. De Wendel
? VICHY'S "NEW ORDER"
Groups promoted similar continuity in the control of the Central Administration. Prior to 1936 the CGPF had but two presidents, M. Darcy from 1919 to 1925 and M. Duchemin from 1925 to 1936.
How much real power, however, did the pre-Matignon CGPF actually have? Opinions vary. The International Labor Office closes its sketch of the organization with the somewhat equivocal generalization, "In practice . . . the General Confederation of Production is, beyond doubt, only a permanent meeting place for the heads of different federations; its power is ephemeral, inasmuch as it depends on their consent, and yet considerable, if, by the ex- change of views, it brings about unanimity between them. " ^^
The latter object has dominated the CGPF from its beginning, as is well shown by that remarkable series of addresses given by M. Duchemin before its annual meetings from 1925 on. On the one hand, it was to bring about unity of points of view, unity of interests, unity of pressure, and unity of purposes amongst em- ployer and business groups in the country in general. And on the other, it was to collaborate with the government in all things touching upon the vast medley of interests which its organizational dragnet covered.
How effectively the CGPF accomplished these objectives is ex- tremely difficult to say. Its initial ejfforts in the promotion of em- ployer unity led to the establishment of a series of more or less purely study and discussion groups such as the Economic Com- mission for the study of general economic questions, the Commis- sion on Social Questions for the study of labor-employer relations, and the Commission for the Scientific Organization of Labor (pri- marily "scientific management").
interests spread out from the two iron and steel producing firms of Les Petits-Fils de F. de Wendel (capital stock of Fr. 117,180,000) and De Wendel et Cie (capital stock of Fr. 80,000,000). In 1938, Francois, Humbert and Maurice de Wendel held official positions in sixteen other companies, including the Banque de Union Parisienne, Suez, Peiiarroya, the Union des Mines, several coal-mining companies, two tin com- panies, other iron and steel manufacturing companies, insurance companies, etc. Baron Petiet was president of the Union des Consummateurs de Produits M^tallur- giques et Industriels (capital stock of Fr. 105,000,000) and of Equipment Electrique des Vehicules (capital stock of Fr. 13,000,000) and was vice-president of Soci^t^ M^tallurgique de la Bonneville (capital stock of Fr. 10,000,000). In each case the companies mentioned, or companies associated with them, dominate the more pow- erful trade associations, syndicats, comptoirs, federations, and confederations in the industry which, in turn, dominate the CGPF Group of which they are members.
35 Wolfe, "Employers' Organisations in France. "
135
--
? 136 VICHY'S "NEW ORDER"
Alongside these Commissions, it founded autonomous organizations with which it continued to work in intimate contact such as:
The Central Interprofessional Committee on Apprenticeship The Industrial Hygiene Association
The Central Committee on Family Allowances
The Central Committee on Social Insurance
The Central Committee for Fiscal Study and Protection. ^(R)
The CGPF has sought to work with all special-interest or special- function business associations whose purposes dovetail at some point or other with its own objects. Thus it has cooperated with the National Association for Economic Expansion, "which gives as its object the increase of French export," and with the Associa- tion of Industry and Agriculture, which is especially interested "in problems of national tariff protection for industry and agricul- ture. " It has established a special body called the Committee for Conciliation and Arbitration, charged with eliminating, wherever possible, conflicts between business interests, and with a view to forestalling intervention by public authorities. ^^
As for relations with the government, the CGPF from the outset followed a two-fold policy. On the one hand it asked for complete self-government, meaning by this a clear-cut circumscription of governmental and private business spheres of authority, with the government giving business any aid it might need, but, so far as control was concerned, following a policy of complete and un- equivocal hands off. On the other hand, it wanted the right to participate directly in all governmental action affecting the in- terests of its members at any point, and freely importuned demanded is perhaps the better word--governmental aid and as- sistance whenever such support could be turned to good business account.
A writer in the widely circulated Revue des Deux Mondes ^^ speaks *of "the participation of the professional groups [meaning trade and employers' associations] in the management of the state" in these words:
A remarkable characteristic of the professional groups is their tendency to intervene in the management of public affairs wherever social and
36 Duchemin, op. cit. , p. 8. a? idem.
ssAntoine de Tarle, "L'Organisation professionelle patronale en France," Revue des Deux Mondes, March, 1925, pp. 177-96.
? VICHY'S "NEW ORDER'*
economic questions are concerned. The employer justifies his social role: does not the responsibility of insuring the means of existence of the nation rest upon him? We have told in these pages [Revue des Deux Mondes, February 15, 1924] in what manner the great German associations insisted on terms which would bring about the decay of the State in Germany. It is not the same in France; the industrial groups are not looking for a substitute for public authority; they demand the right to collaborate on questions which are in their sphere. The prin- ciple has been granted. The constitutional bill on the Chambers of Commerce provides that they be consulted and that they give their advice on these questions. By a circular dated February 1, 1923, the Minister of Commerce confirmed the appeal which he had addressed to them in 1919, and invited them to get together with the Minister in order to facilitate the consultations which the Minister counted on hav- ing with them on economic questions. ^^
Thus organized, business was prepared to "intervene," in the words of M. Duchemin, in the affairs of government on a compre- hensive scale.
Wherever a matter has come up dealing with legislation on social insur- ance, accidents in work or occupational diseases . . . of protection or the conservation of water resources . . . of proposed legislation dealing with patents and trade marks, of consular elections, the protection of savings, or the reform of the Law of 1867 dealing with Corporations, upon all these questions the Confederation of Employers has taken a position and has intervened with the proper public authorities and Ministerial Departments, or with Commissions of the two Chambers. *"
Examples were offered of "intervention" dealing with tariff questions. It participated in all discussions of tariff truces, includ- ing, on one occasion the drafting of a "Memorandum to the French Government at the Second Conference for Concerted Economic Action. " On another occasion it participated in the World Eco- nomic Conference at London. It collaborated with the govern- ment in negotiations dealing with and the organization of the Franco-German Economic Commission.