Letter to Karl Marx, March 31, 1857

Author(s) Friedrich Engels
Written 31 March 1857


First published abridged in Der Briefwechsel zwischen F. Engels und K. Marx, Bd. 2, Stuttgart, 1913 and in full in: Marx and Engels, Works, First Russian Edition, Vol. XXII, Moscow, 1929
Published in English for the first time in Marx-Engels Collected Works, Volume 40


ENGELS TO MARX

IN LONDON

Manchester, 31 March 1857

Dear Marx,

You will have received the £5 note, K/S 84562, this morning. As regards 'depending on' me, don't give it another thought. I should take umbrage if you were not to inform me when the SOVEREIGNS' armed intervention is required. I shall see how my finances go in April; I think I shall be able to manage a bit more during the second half, at any rate.

The Tribune's proposal is most cunning and, since the chaps are practically certain to print only one article a week, I shouldn't send two save on special occasions such as the present elections, etc., etc. However, circumstances will come to your aid, and in all probability the good Yankees will have no reason to complain about the DULLNESS OF EUROPEAN POLITICS this summer and autumn, while their own merry-go-round will gradually come to a halt.

I have hardly followed the Persian and Chinese military ventures[1] at all, indeed there has been a great dearth of detail. About Captain Jones I know nothing. It would now be utterly impossible to get together the necessary material, but when we get fuller news about the last big cavalry attack in Persia I shall see what can be done.

The pamphlets have arrived.[2] If only I could get hold of your old Tribune articles![3] Most of the stuff is in them. Washington Wilks[4] and Palmerston for Premier contain only generalities, and Chisholm Anstey's speech in the House of Commons on 23 February 1848 is fearfully disjointed though very important, more especially by reason of the personal matters relating to the Portfolio[5] but also, here and there, by reason of its contents. The only really cogent pamphlets are your two Tucker pamphlets, especially Unkiar Skelessi. If you can supply me with any more material, so much the better I have taken steps to improve the storage arrangements.

The eight thousand philistines who voted for the fattest man in Manchester (Potter) because he makes up for his lack of brains by the size of his bottom, are already ashamed of their victory. All the same, the elections have made an enormous impression here, and the 'Manchester' Party[6] is beginning to take stock of its performance over the past 6 years and to discover in what it has failed. I don't think we shall hear very much more of PEACE-PARTY TALK 155 for the time being, while on the other hand Bright (if he rallies) will, with one or two others, undoubtedly advocate a more far-reaching electoral reform and, before long, Jones may well receive some propositions from these bourgeois. For Pam the most gratifying thing must be his triumph over Bright, Gibson, Cobden,

Miall and Fox (Oldham); I am inclined to believe that the fellow will get a WORKING MAJORITY of 60-100. But be that as it may, we shall have unadulterated Palmerston and WITH A VENGEANCE I've found one of the passages from the Nord in The Morning Post, but only eulogising his abilities.[7] The one in which he appears as a 'TRULY BRITISH MINISTER' is not to be found. Our local Palmerstonians and bourgeois offered Bob Lowe, should he be defeated here, the sum of £2,000 to cover his election expenses in some other wretched hole. The ass refused, preferring the safety of Kidderminster, only to be trounced there. But never again will he be able to come to Manchester; he has behaved like a real blackguard—first he allows the philistines to compromise themselves on his behalf, then cries off and, at the same time, writes an article for The Times in which he says it would be scandalous if Manchester were not to return Bright.[8]

This time Philistia was tremendously divided. The vast majority of the bourgeoisie, a small majority of the lower-middle class, against Bright and Gibson. Quakers and Catholics for Bright to a man; the Greeks likewise; the established Germans against him. A drunken anti-Bright man shouted: 'WE WONT HAVE HOME POLICY, WE WANT FOREIGN POLICY.' What the rationale of the local elections more or less amounts to is: To hell with all questions of reform and class matters. After all, we philistines form the majority of voters, that suffices. The clamour against the aristocracy, etc., is tedious and produces no tangible result. WE DEARLY LOVE A LORD FOR ALL THAT. We've got FREE TRADE and as much bourgeois social reform as we require. We're flourishing like mad, especially since Pam reduced war INCOME TAX. So let's all foregather on territory where we are all equal, and let's be ENGLISHMEN, John Bulls, under the leadership of that TRULY BRITISH MINISTER Pam. Such is the present mood of the majority of philistines.

What is piquant about the business up here is the burial of the Anti-Corn Law League; Smith P. Robinson (HON. SEC) and George Wilson, 'THAT RESPECTABLE FIXTURE' are being thrown out of Newalls Buildings and the GREAT LIBERAL PARTY is casting about for a new organisation. G. Wilson loses his snug berth and his status on the strength of which he rose to be CHAIRMAN of the Lancashire and Yorkshire railways at a salary of £1,000 per annum—another snug berth that will soon go west, permitting

Wilson to go back to starch manufacturing as in the days of PROTECTION. But your Manchester philistine—even if a partisan of Bright—heaves a sigh of relief at the long-awaited demise of that old incubus, THE LEAGUE[9] !

Apropos, I believe that the Ch. Anstey pamphlet contains only a small part of Pam's reply[10] —the debate lasted 4 days. Couldn't you get hold of the rest? And could you send me a copy of Urquhart's new rag, [11] or whatever it's called? What is there in it by you?

NB. You might also, if called for, send me the tides of anything else of any use concerning the Pam affair; I could then get them myself up here.

Hearty congratulations on your family prospects. What are the girls doing? They must be quite big by now. I look forward very much to seeing them at Whitsun. Warm regards to them and your wife.

Your

F. E.

  1. ↑ A reference to the Anglo-Persian war of 1856-57 and the second Opium War, 1856-60.
  2. ↑ Engels here refers to the discussion of the so-called Five Points or preliminary terms for peace between Russia and the coalition that fought Russia in the Crimean war (Britain, France, Turkey and Piedmont). The Five Points were presented to the Russian government through Austria in the form of an ultimatum by the Allied Powers in December 1855. They called for replacement of the Russian protectorate over the Danubian principalities by a protectorate of all the contracting parties, a revision of the Bessarabian border involving Russia's relinquishment of the territory along the Danube, neutralisa tion of the Black Sea, closure of the Straits to warships, a ban on the maintenance by Russia and Turkey of arsenals and navies in the Black Sea, and collective protection of the Sultan's Christian subjects by the Great Powers. The Allied Powers also reserved themselves the right to impose additional demands. The terms were accepted by the Russian government and provided the basis for the Paris peace talks. The Turkish fortress of Kars in Transcaucasia was captured, after a long siege, by the Russians on 28 November 1855. The fall of Kars, the last major event of the Crimean war, speeded up the termination of hostilities. Under the Paris peace treaty (March 1856) Kars was returned to Turkey in exchange for the evacuation of Sevastopol and the other Russian towns held by the Allies.—7, 21
  3. ↑ This refers to those articles of Marx's series Lord Palmerston which appeared in the New-York Daily Tribune. In contrast to The People's Paper, which published all eight articles and as a consecutive whole (see present edition, Vol. 12, pp. 341-406), the Tribune carried only six articles, in the form of four separate leaders under different titles: 'Palmerston', corresponding to articles 1 and 2 in The People's Paper (NYDT, 19 October 1853), 'Palmerston and Russia', corresponding to article 3 (NYDT, 4 November 1853), 'A Chapter of Modern History', corresponding to articles 4 and 5 (NYDT, 21 November 1853), and 'England and Russia', corresponding to article 7 (NYDT, 11 January 1854).— 111, 115
  4. ↑ W. Wilks, Palmerston in Three Epochs.
  5. ↑ In a speech in the House of Commons on 23 February 1848 Anstey presented the facts relating to the publication in 1835, in Urquhart's series The Portfolio, of secret documents from the archives of the Grand Duke Constantine, Viceroy of Poland. The documents had been seized by Polish insurgents in 1830 and were later handed over by Polish refugees to Palmerston. It was only at the insistence of King William IV that Palmerston made them available for publication (for details see present edition, Vol. 12, pp. 386-87).—115 155
  6. ↑ Engels means the vote of no confidence in Palmerston's government after a debate on the Anglo-Chinese conflict in the House of Commons lasting from 26 February to 3 March 1857. The conflict has been provoked by the bombardment of Canton in October 1856 in retaliation for the Chinese authorities' arrest of a contraband vessel sailing under the British flag. The bombardment was the prelude to another colonial war by Britain—later in alliance with France—against China, the Second Opium War (1856-60). After the vote Palmerston dissolved Parliament, and in the new election his candidates, who supported the aggression against China, beat the Opposition even in their stronghold, Manchester, securing a majority for Palmerston in the House of Commons. Marx dealt with these events in several articles published in the New-York Daily Tribune in March and April 1857 (see present edition, Vol. 15). The Free Traders advocated non-interference of the state in the economy. Their stronghold was Manchester (hence the Manchester School and the Manchester Party). In the 1840s and 1850s the Free Traders were an independent political group which later formed the Left wing of the Liberal Party. The Peelites were moderate Tories advocating concessions to the commercial and industrial bourgeoisie. The repeal of the Corn Laws in 1846 by their leader, Robert Peel, caused a split in the Tory party, with the Peelites forming an independent group that allied itself with the Whigs. In the late 1850s they joined the Liberal Party.—104, 107, 109, 111, 113, 115
  7. ↑ 'From Our Own Correspondent. greatest advantages...', The Times, No. 22634, 21 March 1857.
  8. ↑ 'One of the greatest advantages...', The Times, No. 22634, 21 March 1857.
  9. ↑ The facts connected with the election campaign in Manchester and some data concerning Robert Lowe, John Potter and other candidates for Parliament related by Engels in this letter and those of 11, 20 and 31 March were used by Marx in his article 'The Defeat of Cobden, Bright and Gibson' (present edition, Vol. 15).—104, 110, 117
  10. ↑ Engels presumably refers to the pamphlet The Betrayal of England, compiled of Anstey's speeches in the House of Commons debate lasting from 8 February to 1 March 1848.
  11. ↑ The Free Press