In the 1960's academic attention became increasingly focused, in many cases of necessity, on the forms taken by student protest and, possibly in conjunction with this, there appeared almost simultaneously a corresponding upsurge of interest in the history of organized international youth movements, many of them with their origins in the late nineteenth or early twentieth centuries. Such a development in historiography would seem to contradict the statement once made by an English youth leader, Leslie Paul, that “because the apologetics of youth movements are callow, their arguments crude, and their practices puerile, they are dismissed or ignored by scholars.”

On May 1, 1906, the Confédération Générate du Travail (CGT), the national organization of French revolutionary syndicalism, demanded that the French government reduce the legal work day for industrial workers to eight hours. The CGT would back this request with force, and it called upon all workers to strike by May 2. The response was overwhelming; work-stoppage was widespread, and it appeared that government and industry would have to yield. By May 2, over 200,000 workers had walked off the job. The number of establishments affected was impressive. 295 strikes which called specifically for a work-day reduction involved 12,585 firms, a high figure compared to previous years. (Strikes for a ten-, nine-, or eight-hour work day were a part of the CGT's eight hour day movement.) For instance, only 14% of the strikes in 1904 and 16% in 1905 aimed primarily at a work-day reduction compared to 64% in 1906. Also, in 1905, there were only a total of 830 strikes affecting 177,666 workers and 5,302 establishments, while in 1904, 271,097 workers participated in 1,026 strikes involving 17,250 establishments. By comparison, the total number of firms struck in 1906 was 19,637 and involved 438,466 workers in 1,309 strikes. The Ministry of Labor conceded that the increased number had resulted from the CGT's eight-hour day movement.

The topic of this paper might at first glance appear to lack interest. In fact, however, it is for many reasons of real significance. The men who brought about the set of achievements, to be discussed, and its migration, respectively, played roles on the stages of history, science, and business; and a whole bundle of social and economic problems was solved by a concatenation of measures. Last but not least, we can study here almost step by step a case of eighteenth- and early nineteenth-century institutional migration.