ATIONAL interest in France
_ centres on upcoming elec-
tions. A stop-off and change of
plans in Paris, on my way home
from the Big Four Foreign
_~ Ministers conference in Geneva,
- gave me the\unique opportunity
to get the lowdown on them—
an interview with the head of
the Communist delegation in
Parliament, Jacques Duclos.

The Communist party is the
largest in France. Duclos, of
Course, is the same Duclos who
became. a legend during the
years of resistance to the Nazi
Occupation.

Duclos was the boldest leader
of that resistance. He hammer-
€d away on the need of uniting
all patriotic Frenchmen, Com-
musists, Catholics, Socialists
and followers of DeGaulle. The
Gestapo could never catch up

' With him, although he never
left France. He was “hidden”
among those he led—the legions
of French patriots. ‘

_ While in Geneva I broached
the question of getting an inter-
view with Duclos to the cor-
Tespondent for the French Com-
munist daily newspaper,
!'Humanite. It took just a phone
Call, and the appointment was
Made.

_A writer on l’Humanite, Hen-
Tletta Reuillot, took me to the
€normous Place de la Concorde
Where the National, Assembly
of France meets. I heard my
Companion say to the gendarme
at the door of the assembly
—“Communist Group, please.”
1 ‘The police escorted us under
Nn arch and pointed the way to
& guard. Then the guard, “Com-
™unist Group, please,” and we
Were escorted to the head-
Quarters assigned to the Com-
Munist party.

*

_ We got right down to the
Interview after a hearty hand-
Shake. Duclos chuckled as he
Spoke about how desperate
Were the reactionaries’ efforts
to cut down the Communist
Tepresentation in parliament.
ou realize how much poppy-
“Cock are the reports about the
‘alleged demise of the French
<Ommunists. If they had de-
clined in strength as the big
Usiness press in the Western
Countries has been claiming for
years, all the reactionaries
Wouldn’t be so busy with only
One thing—trying to limit» the
Communists to fewer seats than
their votes would entitle them
°, trying to change the elec-
Cral laws to give the Com-
Munists the least number of
Seats despite their enormous
Popular vote. :
‘Why did the Faure govern-
ment seek early elections in-
Stead of waiting till next year?”
Was my first question to Duclos.
Fr € government of Edgar
Beco Duclos: replied, ‘de-
ued to advance the date of the
Bons for fear of seeing the’
a ttuation get worse in the coming
| “onths, both on the domestic
ans and in colonial affairs,
nd out of fear of the develop-
€nt of popular opposition.
= New sacrifices will be de-
Bed of the French people
Al order to pursue the war in
Seria. Sacrifices in money and
ay en sacrifices also, for from
ee indications, new military
if Ad Will have to be sent there
ref © government persists in
wit, ne to open negotiations
tiy the qualified representa-
€s of the Algerian people.”

a

r

ection crisis
in France

By JOSEPH CLARK -

“And how do the French
Communists feel about. early
elections ?”

“As for the French Com-
munist party, faithful to demo-
cratic traditions it never recoils
from the prospect of a popular
consultation.

“That is why it expressed
itself in favor of early elections,
whereas other parties, including
the Socialist party and the
Radical party, with Mendes-
France at its leadership, have
tried to delay the elections, de-
manding as a precondition a
change in the electoral law.”

*

“How are they trying to
change the electoral law?” I
asked. “And furthermore,
wasn’t the existing law adopted
as a means of cutting down
representation of the Commu-
nist party below its propor-
tionate strength ?”

“In 1951,” Duclos explained,
“at the time of the last National
Assembly elections, a law known
as the ‘apparentements” was
voted by various parties, in-
cluding the Socialists. This made
possible the theft of 80 Com-
munist seats, although the Com-
munist party came out ahead of
all others with more than five
million votes Thus, with little
more than half the votes of the
Communists, the Socialists were
able to get far more seats in
the assembly than the Com-
munists. This was accomplished
by deals made with right wing
parties in runoff elections.”

PREMIER FAURE .
His government fell this week

* munists

Now, however, Ducdos con-
tinued, “it is difficult for the
Socialist party and even the
Radical party to renew the
‘operation apparentement’ with
the parties of the right, which in
the course of the outgoing
legislature have pursued an un-
popular policy and voted the
clerical laws that have aroused
a strong current of opposition
among the people.”

Support for complete sepa-
ration of church and state is a
majority sentiment in France.
On this issue the Socialists have
not been able to compromise
their principles as they have on
many other questions.

“Unable to work ‘apparente-
ments’ again, the Socialist and
the Radical parties have carried
on a campaign for what is known
as the ‘scrutin d’arondissements’
(the single district majority
system), which in case of a run-
off (due to the absence of an
absolute majority) permits the
most immoral deals.

“This type of balloting is the
one which Gambetta (a French
leader of the last century) cal-
led ‘a broken mirror in which
France no- longer recognizes

herself’

“The best known leaders of
French socialism in the past
century and at the beginning of
this one, Jean Guesde and Jean
Jaures, expressed themselves
vigorously against this type of
electoral device. As seen by
those who want to restore this,
it would permit the theft of a
great number of seats from the
Communist party and reduce the
parliamentary representation of
the working class.

“This is why, in the spirit of
absolute faithfulness to the
traditions of the French work-
ing class movement, the Com-
munist party fights for propor-
tional representation merited by
its votes.”

*

Would ‘the proposed electoral
change hurt only the Commun-
ists?” I asked.

“One of the most certain
consequences of the single dis-
trict majority system,’ Duclos
answered, “ would be, by weak-
ening the Communists, to per-
mit the election of a reactionary
majority which would worsen
the policy pursued by the present
legislature.

“What the French people want,
on the other hand is the triumph
of a left majority. Such a victory
cannot be assured except to the
extent that the Communist party
of France will be represented
in the National Assembly in pro-
portion to its influence in the
country.’ ’”

“Do you expect greater unity
between Socialists and Com-
in this election?” I
asked. “And on what issues ?”

“More and more Socialist
workers,’ Duclos said, “under-
stand more clearly each day
that only the united action of
the working class, in the first
place of the~Communists and
Socialists, would realize the uni-
ty of the democratic and national
forces and impose a change of
policy. R

“Such an evolution of opinion
is now taking place in direct
relation to the adoption by the
Socialist party, under popular
pressure, of political positions
close to those of the Communists
on a certain number of points,

“That's the way it is with
respect to the basic economic

demands of the working class
and the working farm popula-

tion.”
*

“How would you sum up the
aims of the Communist party in
the coming elections?” I asked.
_ “The Communist: party,” Du-
clos replied, “at the National
Assembly as well as at the last
session of its central committee,
has underlined its readiness to
do everything to guarantee the
victory of the program I have
outlined.

“Likewise, the Communists
have declared that they are

JACQUES DUCLOS addresses a Communist rally.

.

firmly resolved to unite with
the Socialist party and with
other republican forces, after
the elections as well, to pro-
mote a policy corresponding to
the wishes of the people, and
to give France the government
she awaits.

“Thus, with the aim of making.
possible the victory of a left
majority and earrying out. a
new policy, the Communists are
determined to conduct the elec-
toral struggle, fighting against
all divisive manoeuvres, as the
interests of the working class
and the people and the best in-
sist ae of France require.”

Utopia lost

pees: the austere legal atmos-

phere of the Land Registry
Office in London last week came
people from a far-off world.
They told of their life ina colony
in Britain where, at its founding
in 1898, the colonists did not
believe in private property or
the rule of law. .

The rules of the colony have
changed now, but the chief regis-
trar was told that when the
colony was founded near Stroud,
Gloucestershire, all 12 colonists
started to live in one house under
a communal system and no
marriages. Only free unions ex-

isted. between the men and
the women. ;
They owned no_ clothes

privately. When a man wanted
a shirt he went to a cupboard
and took the first one he saw.
They took turns to go to prison
for non-payment of taxes.

The colony now has 90 mem-
bers.

Mrs. Emma Jane Wexham, 75,
of Whiteway, Gloucestershire,
who said she was not a colonist,
lost her application before the
chief registrar for registration
of a bungalow and land at
Whiteway,; near Stroud, site of
the colony.

Some of the colonists objected.
They were Mrs. Mary Robert,
of Whiteway, and Sudbury
Protheroe, of Salisbury, one of
the original colonists:

Giving evidence for them,
Eugene Gasper Marin, a dis-
tinguished fixure with flowing
grey hair and a grey goatee
beard, said he had lived at
Whiteway since August 1914, ex-
cept for ten years from 1928,
when he was “roaming over
Asia and Africa searching for
ethnological materials.”

During that ten years his

wife lived at Whiteway.
that time colonists held land
on what they called “use pos-
session.”

Another witness for the colo-
nists, 78-year-old Mrs. Cather-
ine Mylles, said she and her late
husband lived at Whiteway for
about ten years.

“When we went there we
understood we could have a
piece of land as long as we
worked on it, but we could not
possess it in any way. As far
as I can remember, that princi-
‘ple still operated when we. left
in 1913.”

But Miss Lily Barbara, who
described herself as a music
teacher, “over 30,” and said she
went to Whiteway in 1937, com-
plained that the attitude of the
the colony was not consistent
with Tolstoyan principles. “They
have terrible meetings and
fight and smash windows,” she
said.

When the land for the colony
was originally bought, said
Andrew Goodall, appearing for
Mrs. Wrexham, none 6f the
colonists wanted to be known as
the legal owner.

So three men, _ including
Protheroe, took the conveyance
in their names and then burnt
it before all the others.

The col6nists would not
recognise majority vote or con-_
cede any member the authority
of chairmanship.

But the communal system
changed ‘and families - were
allowed to work pieces of land
for themselves and put up
buildings which the builders
could sell if they vacated their
lots.

PACIFIC TRIBUNE — DECEMBER 2, 1955 — PAGE $

At i