politically," a problem, thirty years
later, still unsolved. It is a pity that the references to Co-operation
in "Fabian Essays" were not modified in the light of the Conference
which was held after the lectures were written but before they were
published. No record of the Conference seems to have been preserved.

Chapter VI

"To your tents, O Israel": 1894-1900

Progress of the Society--The Independent Labour Party--Local Fabian
Societies--University Fabian Societies--London Groups and Samuel
Butler--The first Fabian Conference--Tracts and Lectures--The 1892
Election Manifesto--The Newcastle Program--The Fair Wages Policy--The
"Fortnightly" article--The "Intercepted Letter" of 1906.

During the next two or three years the Society made rapid progress. The
membership was 541 in 1892, 640 in 1893, and 681 in 1894. The
expenditure, L640 to March, 1891, rose to L1100 for 1892, and L1179 in
1893. In both these years large sums--L350 and L450--were given by two
members for the expenses of lectures in the provinces, and in provincial
societies the growth was most marked. In March, 1892, 36 were recorded:
the report for 1893 gives 74, including Bombay and South Australia. This
was the high-water mark. The Independent Labour Party was founded in
January, 1893, at a Conference at which the Fabian Society of London and
nine local Fabian Societies were represented, and from this time onward
our provincial organisation declined until, in 1900, only four local and
four University Societies remained.

The attitude of the parent society towards its branches has always been
somewhat unusual. In early days it made admission to its own ranks a
matter of some difficulty. A candidate resident in London had to secure
a proposer and seconder who could personally vouch for him and had to
attend two meetings as a visitor. We regarded membership as something of
a privilege, and a candidate was required not only to sign the Basis,
but also to take some personal trouble as evidence of zeal and good
faith. To our provincial organisation the same principle was applied. If
the Socialists in any town desired to form a local society we gave them
our blessing and received them gladly. But we did not urge the formation
of branches on lukewarm adherents, and we always recognised that the
peculiar political methods of the London Society, appropriate to a body
of highly educated people, nearly all of them speakers, writers, or
ac