Collectivists of this group are called “Possibilists” and “Opportunists,” on account of their temporizing inclinations. Although M. de Laveleye states that they are gaining favor with the laborers as opposed to the Irreconcilables, they have few leaders, or, at any rate, talkers of note. On occasion of the election at Belleville, when a deputy was to be elected to replace Gambetta, the evolutionist collectivists nominated a respectable mechanic by the name of J. B. Dumay. He was not, however, elected. The revolutionary collectivists, also called Marxists, are divided into two factions, owing to personal rivalries. These are called the “Fédération du Centre,” among whom are Jules Guesde, Paul Lafargue, Émile Massard, and Gabriel Deville; and the “Union Fédérative,” among whom are B. Malon, author of the work which I have several times cited; Paul Brousse, and Joffrin, a municipal councillor, who recently demanded of the council the execution of a large number of socialistic measures, like the erection of city workshops (_ateliers municipaux_) to furnish work to the unemployed, the establishment of bakeries and meat-markets in order to sell provisions at a moderate price, and the construction of houses to be let to laborers at cost price. At the time when Dumay was candidate at Belleville for the place in the Chamber of Deputies which Gambetta’s death left vacant, the revolutionary collectivists nominated Jules Guesde, who received only a small number of votes. He issued, however, an electoral programme, which is valuable as an authentic statement of principles approved by his party at several different congresses between 1879 and 1882. It is as follows: “_Considering_: That the emancipation of the productive class is that of all human beings, without distinction of sex or race; that the producers can never be free until they are in possession of the means of production (lands, factories, ships, banks, credit, etc.); that there are only two forms under which the means of production can belong to them: “1. The individual form, which has never existed as a general and universal fact, and which is being eliminated more and more by industrial progress; “2. The collective form, whose material and intellectual elements are furnished by the very development of capitalistic society:—