Several writers have referred to October 4th in their works. Some have made mistakes, others have ignored some important facts. Arnold Wesker in his play Chicken Soup with Barley, gives a good account or impression of the feefeeling and atmosphere seen from the homes of some of those who took part.

However, he manages to mix up the events, which I suspect he took out of context from various reports which were incorrect in themselves. I do not criticise his work which after all, is not expected to be historically perfect. He has some licence to create.

He says in the author’s note, ‘My people are not caricatures. They are real (though fiction)... ’ The whole of the first act mirrors what was happening on October 4th. Here he implies that the slogan ‘They shall not pass’ came from the defence of Madrid assisted by the International Brigade. These events came later than October 4th. The International Brigade did not yet exist. The ‘Tom Mann Centuria’ did, and Arnold Wesker refers to it and Nat Cohen and Sam Masters. He refers to a trip over the Pyrenees to join the Spanish people’s fight. This had not yet begun in any significant way.

One character, Monty, says:

‘Hey! You know who organised the first British group? Nat Cohen! I used to go to school with him. Him and Sam Masters were on a cycling holiday in France. As soon as they heard of the revolt they cycled over to Barcelona and started the ‘Tom Mann Centuria.’'

This is almost word for word what William Rust wrote in his book on the British Battalion of the International Brigade.

Another character, Harry (coming to the door) says: ‘He’s a real madman, Nat Cohen. He chalks slogans right outside the police station. I used to work with him’ (1). I wonder where Arnoid Wesker got that from? I knew his aunt Sarah. We were very often in disagreement over the Party policy. Nat was ° with me in this. Many of those who disagreed with us used to say that Nat was a ‘Hot-head’. Nothing could be further from the truth. Yet this mud slinging appeared to have stuck to Nat’s reputation. Arnold’s father Joe, was in my view, a lovable person. I heard people close to him criticize him for characteristics they did not like in order to demean him. Many people had their characters maligned by those who had political axes to grind.

Stays Red. Jack Dash, the dockers’ rank-and-file leader, in his book Good Morning Brothers does speak about anti-Fascist struggles in Stepney, but he also makes some mistakes. He describes an outdoor meeting at Eric Street, where he says he listened to Pat Devine and Nat Cohen ‘who had returned from Spain after being badly wounded’. Pages 35-36. He says ‘Pat Devine and Nat Cohen between them had convinced me. I signed and handed the form back to Beatie Marks—a good comrade who, still thirty years after that night continues to do consistent Party work and (though well over retiring age) to give her services in the office at King Street (2). On page 37 he says, ‘It was the same summer of 1937 that Sir Oswald Mosley, leader of the British Union of Fascists announced his decision to march through East London with his Blackshirt followers’. Jack Dash has not done his homework at all well if he could write that. It wasn’t 1937. It wasn’t summer when we first heard of Mosley’s proposed march. Nat Cohen certainly wasn’t wounded and back from Spain before October 4th 1936. The confused reporting by some who were present on October 4th is understandable if we examine the attitude of the CP both before and after that great day. Jack Dash goes on to give his own report of what happened. He makes no reference at all to the differences of opinion inside the Party, if indeed he knew about them. Like so many CP spokesmen, he has claimed for the Party more credit for what happened than they are entitled to claim. That’s putting it very mildly. I hope someone will write the whole history of October 4th.one day.

* * * * *

After October 4th we had a hurried first victory march through East London starting from Tower Hill on Monday evening (3). We were inundated with cases arising from arrests on October 4th. 84 men and women went before the magistrates. We advertised that legal aid would be available to all who required it at room 5, ‘Circle House’ (4). Appeals were opened for funds to meet expenses and to further the work against Fascism (5) (See photo). The abolition of Fascist private armies was demanded as a first step for the prevention of extended violence in East London. Our London District Committee took over the main campaign for fund-raising and other aid without consulting us in Stepney. On October 6th the Daily Worker carried reports from the DPC and appeals for money to be sent to them (6). They also set about making plans to follow October 4th. Once again we did not take part in their discussions or decisions. It was clear that the DPC was going to play a bigger part in the internal life of the Stepney CP branch.

Meanwhile the Fascists in Stepney did not intend to take their defeat lying down. On October 6th they went on the rampage through Stepney Green, beating up old people. Crowds of people had to leave their beds and come onto the streets to meet these attacks. They chased the Blackshirts for half a mile to their headquarters in Duckett Street. Police reinforcements had to be called in to prevent the crowds from wrecking the premises. It was discovered that in order to prevent police interference with the marauding bands of Fascists, the telephone wires had been cut in the district (7).

The fighting in Spain could not be ignored in all our preoccupation with events in Stepney. Our press reports said that ‘neutrality’ was crippling the government forces. A committee of enquiry into breaches of international law, relating to non-intervention in Spain was established. The Labour Party Conference in Edinburgh sent Attlee and Greenwood to London to see Neville Chamberlain, acting head of government. They were to report back to the Conference on the Friday (8). We had urgent business in Stepney. The London CP went into action for an anti-Fascist victory march for Sunday October 11th to start from Tower Hill and finish in Victoria Park. We were going to march where the Blackshirts had been prevented from marching, to celebrate our great victory of October 4th. In the meantime a Labour delegation which had attended the Jewish World Congress in Geneva during

August, reported to a meeting in the ‘Circle House’ (9). Also the continuing terror from the Fascists in East London was the subject of appeals to all labour organisations for joint action. These appeals were reported in the Daily Worker, but in the Friday issue which carried the appeal there was no call for the Tower Hill Victory March which was to take place that Sunday (10).

Our demonstration was a huge success and was fully reported. The Daily Worker report said:

‘Last week barricaded streets, paving stones uprooted, thousands of men and women massed in determined resistance and opposition.

Yesterday an orderly procession, banners flying, bands playing, ten thousand workers marching proudly through the streets lined ten deep with fellow workers cheering and saluting as they passed’ (11).

This meant that the Fascists were more determined than ever to keep the terror campaign going. Some local newspaper reports during this period give some idea of what was happening. The City and East London Observer described one such incident under the heading ‘Terror Continues— Hooligans loot and pillage Jewish shops’. The reporter wrote:

‘Last Sunday ...following a Communist demonstration march to Victoria Park, a band of hooligans swept down Mile End Road smashing, looting and _ pillaging the windows of Jewish shopkeepers. . .Stones and missiles were obtained from Clinton Road, Mile End which was under repair. ..None of the shops bearing an English name was molested. The hooligans raced on to the corner of Canal Road where they overturned a car belonging to Mr Philip Levy, a taylor. Armed with sticks, iron bars and other weapons they smashed open the petrol tank. The petrol spurted forth. Aman threw a match and in no time the roadway was a mass of flame. The flaming liquid raced down the gutter. A child playing by the curb was snatched away in the nick of time.

On the main road a man was hurled bodily through a window and a seven-year-old girl was thrown after him. Never before in the History of the East End has there been such frenzied victimisation’ (12).

The East London Advertiser carried the same story in its weekly edition with the headline: ‘Man and child thrown through a shop window’. Subheadings read: ‘Youths dash along thoroughfare—Trail of damaged and looted shops’. Their article spoke of shouts from the rampaging youths of ‘Down with the yids’ and ‘Hail Mosley’ (13).

A letter signed by me was published in the East End News at this time.

My views are clearly stated and, I think, still in keeping with the Party policy of that time. I wrote:

‘We are a section of the great British Labour movement and our activity is of a peaceful and democratic nature. ..We are proud of the fact that the struggle against Fascism is not the monopoly of our Party, but is being taken up by all who love peace and civil liberty. The quarter ofa million Londoners who massed on the streets on October 4th to prevent Mosley’s Blackshirts from passing are evidence that the struggle against Fascism is no petty faction fight, but is the cause of the common people of Britain. . .If the Home Secretary is so indifferent to the fate of British Civil liberties that he will not do his plain duty, at least the people of East London have shown their determination to defend their liberties against Fascist onslaughts...We earnestly trust that no citizens of Stepney will allow themselves to be provoked by Fascists into resorting to retaliatory measures. The Communist Party has always sternly opposed individual terrorism which brings nothing but harm to the socialist cause. The fight against Fascism must be organised and disciplined. Resolutions, petitions and letters should pour into the Home Office and into our members of parliament. A United Front of all anti-Fascist organisations is plainly the first necessity’ (14).

The aftermath of October 4th caused all sorts of people to become interested in Mosley and his activities in East London. Deputations, appeals to parliament, all sorts of meetings, protests and demonstrations, all calling for effective action did not prevent the Fascists from increasing their activities.

The government were more worried about the growth of anti-Fascist forces and decided to use the recent events to attack the labour movement while at the same time pretending to deal with Mosley. There can be no doubt that all I had been arguing about inside the Party for so long was being forced into the open for people to decide what should be done to curb the Fascists. Life in the East End for Jews and for those active in the working class movement was being seriously affected by Mosley’s supporters aided by the police and the courts. The government were seeing these activities as part of their own efforts to keep the unemployed from getting together on a class basis and to hold back the general working class movement which was challenging their policies on all national and international issues. Mosley’s anti-semitism was just the job for diverting attention from the real problems, by finding scapegoats, i.e. the Jews, to account for people’s suffering.

Inside the Stepney CP the debate which had been going on became even more serious. Despite October 4th, or because of it, the members of the Party’s District Committee and those who were opposing what I had been advocating locally were moving towards a position which would make it impossible for me to continue as secretary of the Party in Stepney. Attacks were coming from all directions, including some nasty personal attacks, backbiting and false rumours, a real campaign of character assassination. It was said that I was a hot-head, an Anarchist, Blanquist, putchist etc. simply because I said we would have to defend ourselves from Fascist violence. The time had come for me to deal with these matters which could not be handled by trying to answer all the distortions, lies and personal attacks at meetings or by personal contact with individual members. I would have to try putting my case in writing, hoping my opponents would reply in writing, so that the issues could be put before the members for their decision in the light of the facts, clearly stated.

This decision became more urgent in view of the circulation of a document in mid-October by the DPC. It was entitled ‘The tasks of the Party in East London in the coming period’. This document stated:

‘The Party cannot make any solid achievements if it. neglects its work among key sections of East London workers in the Labour Party, Trade Unions and Co-op guilds.’

The Document proposed:

‘1. The General reviving of the East London Labour Party organisations from their present complacency and stagnation. . .

2. Persistent and careful organised work in Trade Unions to activise them and build them up and to win universal respect for our comrades as leaders

3. The building and consolidating of our Party forces by the development of trustworthy collective leadership of the branches, the careful

training of and utilisation of new recruits and the rooting out of

irresponsibility and indiscipline.’

To fight Mosley, the DPC proposed:

‘i. Wholesale support for the conference of East London Workers organised by the Socialist League, and an East London Conference of all anti-Fascist groups under the auspices of either the local Mayors (mostly Labour Party), or Trades Councils. This Conference would establish an anti-Fascist vigilance committee working closely with the Council for Civil Liberties.

ii. A popular anti-Fascist newspaper

iii. A petition demanding the banning of uniforms and Mosley’s Army.”’.

The DPC further proposed propaganda meetings and touring loudspeaker vans, especially in Bethnal Green where the.Fascists had their base. They proposed indoor winter meetings by invitation only. They suggested tickets be passed round Trade Union branches to ‘ensure an audience of good quality’.

The mass distribution of anti-Fascist literature and leaflets was also proposed plus the setting up of a workers’ bookshop ‘in the Mile End region, say’.

Finally the DPC urged East London Branches of the CP to organise physical culture classes for young workers on a large scale ‘as a counter attack to the BUF classes and government schemes for ‘a fit nation’ (!!). I had to answer this (15).

On top of all the work during the two weeks after October 4th, I decided to make enough time available to produce a document. I had no experience of writing a long statement. The most I had attempted were letters to the press, leaflets and general propaganda statements and things of that kind.

During the time that I was preparing the statement we held a special Branch meeting at the King’s Hall, Commercial Road. Admission was by Party Card.

Speakers included John Mahon and Pat Devine. The subject was Next Steps in East London. The DPC document was to be discussed (16). During the course of that meeting I was attacked and criticised by all the ‘Big Guns’ for ‘Leftist tendencies’. My position was being deliberately undermined and my opinions were given meanings which they did not merit no matter what was said inside the Party. In my view there could be no doubt that the fight against Mosley and police terror in East London was growing. Many organisations were dealing with this situation and the CP could not appear publicly to be in disagreement.

Jewish organisations, the Ex-Servicemen’s anti-Fascist movement, Youth organisations, the Socialist League (Trotskyist tendency in the Labour Party), Labour Party and the ILP all took a hand in denouncing violence and calling on the government to take action against Mosley. The Daily Worker reported that the Jewish People’s Council were sponsoring a bill in parliament prescribing penalties against community libel and making party uniforms illegal (17).

While all this fervour was being built up, I managed to get some friends to help me with typing my statement and sent it off to the Secretariat, DPC on 27th October, 1936, just over three weeks after our great victory of October 4th. In my statement I used the normal Party jargon. I quoted Dimitrov’s report to the 7th World Communist Congress to support my arguments.

I was convinced that I was a good cadre carrying out the ‘correct’ Party Line. I wrote:

‘No one but a fool would deny that work in the Trade Unions is important and that our attention should be given to this work. . .I.. . maintain that what these comrades call Trade Union work amounts to Trade Union Parliamentarianism. They speak of winning the leadership of the Trade Unions instead of winning the leadership of the workers, particularly in factories and ‘on the job’...

Work in Trade Unions means work on the job—in this way positions will be won in the TUs and what is more, Party groups must be built up in the factories or on the job. If we examine the work of these comrades this is not the case for in Stepney there is but one factory group which was put in existence (sic) with the help of work from a street group operating in the area.

In connection with this, Dimitrov’s words at the 7th World Congress are of great value and which I hold is the correct line of the Party in relation to the present situation (sic). It was also at this congress that Dimitrov warned us against the opportunism which would arise from adoption of United Front tactics in this period —which is reflected in the stand made for TU work for the United Front at the expense of our work in the streets and of leading the unorganised and organised masses into action against Fascism and War. . .Dimitrov said ‘.. .A contact Commission between leaders of the Communist and Socialist Parties is necessary to facilitate the carrying out of joint action, but by itself it is far from adequate for a real development of the United Front for drawing the broadest masses into the struggle against Fascism. The Communists and all Revolutionary workers must strive for the formation of elective non-Party class bodies of the United Front at the factories, in the working class districts, among small townsmen and in the villages. . .Joint action of the organised workers is the beginning, the foundation. But we must not lose sight of the fact that the unorganised masses constitute the vast majority of workers. ..In Britain there are approximately five million members of Trade Unions and Parties of various kinds. At the same time the total number of workers is fourteen million. . .’

I continued my statement by adding:

‘I do not say that I have been perfect. . .I (partly due to the fact that I work in a small workshop) have not been very prominent in this (TU) work. Also the tremendous need for work among the unorganised workers has made me tend to give my whole attention to this work. . .’

The statement continued:

‘October 4th is an example of what can be done to get thousands of workers, unorganised and Organised to take part in action against Fascism ...The Committee has failed to follow up October 4th and the victory despite increased membership and influence.

Finally, comrades, I believe if we look to France, we can learn big lessons. The Stavisky scandal was used by the Fascists to provoke disorder to carry out a coup. The prompt action of the workers on the streets prevented the success of this. Further this moved the organised workers into action, i.e. political strikes.

It was after Unity in action against Fascism had been established in the organisations following the action on the streets that the Popular Front government was elected, that Industrial action, i.e. stay-in strikes were carried on against the employers and there followed the unheard of rapid recruitment to the Trade Unions—two million workers joined and the workers gained victories of improved wages and conditions all round.

Trade Union work means leading the workers to action in defence of their wages and working conditions, hours, etc. Along side this there must be action on the streets in defence of our democratic liberties and hard-won rights against Fascism and War.’

I concluded the statement by saying:

'...I claim that these comrades (S. Wesker, C. Segal, R. Silkoff, Greenblati, M. Segal, A. Finklestein) cannot remain in the leadership of Stepney if I am—and if what I say about building the United Front is correct, then these comrades must be removed and given definite responsibility with a new committee, with new comrades (there are many) and certain of the existing ones elected to lead not only the Stepney CP but the Stepney workers. . .’

In a P.S. I added:

‘I would also suggest a closed branch meeting for members to discuss this issue.’

My statement was ignored at first and, needless to say there was no immediate branch meeting to discuss its contents. Neither was it discussed publicly by me or anyone.

* * * * *

Meanwhile, while all this was going on at home things began to get more critical in Spain. Madrid was preparing for a siege. Stalin declared that he would give the Republic Soviet aid. The British Communist Party called to the National Council of Labour for action. It said. “The crisis hour is here— You have it in your power to save Spanish Democracy’ (18). The unemployed were on the march yet again. Eleven contingents were on the way to London to arrive on November 7th (19). We held big meetings in Mile End Baths to prepare for their arrival. These were well supported. Speakers included Councillor Solomons of the Labour Party in addition to our own Wal Hannington and Ted Bramley. The Whitechapel YCL held another meeting at Robert Montefiore school, speakers W. Spence, M. Boardman and J. Jacobs (I was still very active at this point) (20). An interesting tactic was revealed when a Mosley supporter found himself in court for alleged violent activity. In his possession was a letter notifying him of his expulsion form the BUF. It was soon made apparent that many active Fascists carried similar letters so that Mosley could say he was not connected with some of the more outrageous actions of his members if they were arrested (21).

The London tailors were being attacked by their employers who were trying to use the Union in their own interests. We held our usual fraction meeting to decide our line of action to deal with the situation (22). In Spain Italian tanks were within twenty miles of Madrid. An ‘arms for Spain’ Rally was held at Memorial Hall—Labour’s National Joint Council said ‘End arms blockade’ (23). The Jewish Council drafted its bill for dealing with Fascist terror (24). The King’s speech at the opening of Parliament spoke of a Bill to deal with police disorder (25). The proposed conference of all anti-Fascist forces in East London was being organised (26). Hitler terror increased. The news of Andre’s execution was announced. Franco was forced back three miles from Madrid. Headlines in the Daily Worker stated that Madrid had hurled back sixteen attacks—‘Citizens are ready to defend their homes’ (27).

One hundred thousand people turned up at Hyde Park to demonstrate with the Hunger Marchers coming from Scotland and the North of England (28). A formal reading was given to the Public Order Bill which would outlaw all heckling of Fascists. People could be sent to prison for a mere slogan. All workers’ marches could be banned (29). There was a report by Tom Wintringham, Daily Worker Correspondent from the Aragon front in Spain, but it didn’t say very much (30). The hunger marchers were still in London.

Thirty-six Labour MPs attended a meeting with the Minister of Labour. Aneurin Bevan said that the government would be obliged to revise drastically their policy on the unemployed (31). A new mass demonstration took place in Hyde Park announced on 14th November and then the Hunger Marchers went home (32).

An important local CP Branch meeting was held at Old King’s Hall with a speaker from the DPC with admission by Party Card or circular only (33). On 20th and 21st November important articles appeared in the Daily Worker from correspondent Frank Pitcairn. They refered to an International force for the defence of Madrid and for the first time to the ‘fifth column’ There were details of ‘fighting men flocking from all over Europe to help save Spain’ (34).

There was no mention of Nat Cohen and Sam Masters. The news about international forces was much later than it should have been. The Daily Worker for November 24th carried an appeal signed by Harry Pollitt in response to a request by the ‘Leader of the International Legion’ (the first time that such a leader had been refered to) for money for a fully equipped field ambulance.

The appeal refered to the bravery of British volunteers and to the recent deaths in battle of two of them (35). Then a report appeared about Nat and Sam, the first for a long time and only the second since they had begun fighting on July 19th. They had been wounded—Sam in the lungs, Nat in the leg.

They were in the English hospital at Crenen, Barcelona. Nat Cohen was described as ‘Commanding the Tom Mann column’ (36). The big headlines the next day were for the presentation of the New Constitution of the USSR at the eighth congress of Soviets. ‘One sixth of the earth rejoices in new charter of freedom’ said Daily Worker sub-heading. On the same front page were two smaller insets. Two British Communists had been killed fighting in Spain.

Harry Pollitt’s appeal for a field ambulance for Spain had raised the tremendous sum for those days of £700 in three days (37).

At this time I was still fighting with the London District Party leaders. After repeatedly bringing up the question of my statement which was being ignored by the DPC they agreed to have a closed meeting to discuss my statement at the end of November, but on 28th November I received the following letter from the DPC:

‘Dear Comrade,

regarding our arrangement for a discussion on Saturday, the secretariat wants you and Comrade H. Cohen to make an appointment with us at the District Office first of all. After this we can carry out our proposal for an informal conversation. Will you, therefore, please regard Saturday as postponed and phone through some time to Bill Rowe and make an appointment,

Yours fraternally,

J. Mahon’ (38)

At this time, the Stepney CP had a mass sales campaign. We had to report to Fieldgate Street every evening and all day Sunday. We were busy collecting money for the ambulance. In six days the Party workers raised enough money to send an ambulance to Spain (39). The local Stepney branch held a meeting at Dempsey Street school to hear about how Nat Cohen and Sam Masters were getting on. Reports were optimistic (40). There was a clothing workers meeting at ‘Circle House’ (41). The first rumours about Edward VIII’s abdication were being bandied about. Antony Eden at the Foreign Office was taking steps to prevent volunteers from going to Spain (42). Articles appeared in the Daily Worker about the British section of the ‘International Legion’.

There was a supplement about their activities and reports of Britons killed and wounded and of fund-raising efforts (43). The CP leadership was well in control now of this ‘International Legion’. At the same time a conference was called against the new Public Order Bill supported by the Council for Civil Liberties (44). King Edward VIII abdicated and the Duke of York took on his job. Headlines in the Daily Worker read ‘Spain Now Sings Tipperary’ and spoke of the ‘real’ British volunteers at work, some of whom the paper said had been there since October (45). I thought of those two others who had been there since July. British fighters were now pouring into Spain. Soon said the Daily Worker in mid-September, ‘It is hoped to form a British Battalion (46). All this was very confusing. What, I thought, was the British section of the ‘International Legion’ then?

Fascist retaliation in the East End of London continued. Blackshirts attacked the ‘Blue and White Shirt Association’ at their premises in White Horse Lane, Stepney (47). We held a rally at the German Embassy at Carlton House Terrace (48). The Socialist League held a meeting to support the now named International Brigade at Essex Hall in the Strand (49). There was an appeal for Christmas boxes for the volunteers by Harry Pollitt and the headlines read “International Legion takes Unity Step’ (50). Eden announced in Parliament that there would be no ban on the departure of volunteers. The government had been unable to realise hopes about using the non-intervention pact. Two countries did however ban the collective departure of volunteers for Spain, Poland and France with its Popular Front ‘Left’ government headed by Blum (51). So much for Popular Front tactics. We were collecting to send Christmas presents to the International Brigade.

Two British companies were formed and leading London Communists, Springhall and Kerrigan went to Spain (52). We celebrated Christmas in the fervour of it all. Sam Masters recovering well from his injuries came home on leave from Spain and we welcomed him eagerly. We heard reports from Spain.

There were now five hundred in the front line; six Britons had been killed (53).

It was at this time that the neo-trotskyist group within the Labour Party, the Socialist League, launched a paper. It was called The Tribune. It was edited by William Millar. Early contributors included Stafford Cripps and Helen Wilkinson. It was very involved in events in Spain as were we in the CP (54). We advertised in Stepney for lorries to tour the area to collect clothing and for sympathisers of the Spanish Republican cause to come to Fieldgate Street. Our loud-speaker vans blared ‘Madrid Calling’ (55). During the whole of this period of frantic activities my conflicts with members of the Stepney Branch and the DPC continued to smoulder. The Daily Worker celebrated its 7th Birthday and the eventful year of 1936 was over.

Notes

1. The Wesker Trilogy, Penguin Edition, 1966, p 22.
2. Jack Dash, Good Morning Brothers, Mayflower paperback, 1969.
3. DW, 6.10.1936.
4. Ibid.
5. Copy of one such appeal card is in editor's possession.
6. DW, 6.10.1936.
7. DW, 7.10.1936.
8. Ibid.
9. DW, 8.10.1936.
10. DW, 9.10.1936.
11. DW, 12.10.1936.
12. East London Observer, 17.10.1936.
13. East London Advertiser, 17.10.1936.
14. East End News, 6.10.1936.
15. Copy of original document is in editor’s possession.
16. Meeting announced in DW, 19.10.1936.
17. DW, 10.10.1936.
18. DW, 17-21.10.1936.
19. DW, 19.10.1936.
20. DW, 31.10.1936.
21. DW, 19.10.1936.
22. DW, 5.11.1936,
23. DW, 28-29,10.1936.
24. DW, 3.11.1936.
25. DW, 4.11.1936.
26. Ibid.
27. DW, 10.11.1936.
28. DW, 9.11.1936.
29. DW, 10-12.11.1936.
30. DW, 11.11.1936.
31. DW, 13-14.11.1936,
32. DW, 16.11.1936.
33. DW, 18.11.1936.
34. DW, 2.11.1936.
35. DW, 24.11.1936,
36. DW, 25.11.1936.
37. DW, 26.11.1936,
38. Duplicate copies of of correspondence at the time between the author and CP officials are in the editor’s possession. All quotes are from these documents.
39. DW, 26.11.1936.
40. DW, 27.11.1936.
41. DW, 28.11.1936.
42. DW, 3.12.1936.
43. DW, 5.12.1936.
44. DW, 7.12.1936.
45. DW, 14.12.1936.
46. DW, 15.12.1936.
47. DW, 14.12.1936.
48. DW, 15.12.1936.
49. DW, 16.12.1936.
50. DW, 18.12.1936.
52. DW, 19-21.12.1936.
52, DW, 23.12.1936,
53. DW, 26.12.1936.
54. DW, 30.12.1936,
55. DW, 1.1.1937.